Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

I am not in RM cluster, but we live 2 blocks away from Stone Mill elementary , but we take bus for Lakewood. I would have preferred to walk to Stone Mills by crossing Nolan dr. It's within 0.2 miles.

I think some other school system has a good way to readjust boundaries time to time. That way you can optimize everything. MCPS should do the same. I think MCPS is simply running out of space here. Some schools have too many portables. County should stop issuing new housing developments for some time and focus on fixing schools otherwise we are only reacting all the time.

[Anonymous]

I do think the new numbers that addressed the missed Tower Oaks development increase RM5 in the low 90’s in just 5 years is something to closely consider. We really don’t want another boundary zoning issue in the next 5-10 years.

Tower Oaks is a non-issue. Since it doesn't exist yet, the board could easily decide to zone it to Ritchie Park, either in the future or now. The BOE needs to consider the near term (0-5 yrs) impact in the cluster for making their decision. There are simply too many uncertainties with other capital plans and actual demographic changes as a result of development to short-change the near term in hopes of avoiding a long term problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Walking or taking a bus has no impact on bridging the achievement gaps.

Providing FARMS kids a school with less poverty does have an impact on achievements.

RP shouldn't be made a haven for rich folks here. It's a part of RM cluster. MCPS should continue using RP to provide good environment for FARMs kids .

There are lots of schools where kids take bus to another school rather than walking as long as MCPS sees fit. MCPS needs to focus on bridging the achievement gaps and not take this protecting neighborhood of Woodley garden seriously. Woodley Garden doesn't need any protection and Beall has a bit higher FARMs, but WG will be fine even in Beall.

Oddly specific in attempt to point out RP and by inference an option (not really about farms or you would be also looking at the other boundary studies occurring in Maryland) pretty clear which neighborhood this poster is advocating for......

Agree. Trying to be a troll when they are looking out for their own equity, oh I mean well being. Hi Hungerford mom trying to act like she cares. OptionE gives them them a school with a farms rate on the teens. So tempting! Lol.

I wonder why RP posters try to act like they care when all they dream about is 7% FARMS. Option E gives regular classes in RMES5 a FARMS rate in the 20s. It is only fair that FARMS students have a better access to education by being spread among all available schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read Schwartz's paper. As has been pointed out on this board repeatedly, the study is not relevant to the situation of the cluster; it is about the placement of public housing. Additionally, poverty ? FARMS, and Schwartz further states, "The differences suggest the shortcoming of the free and reduced-price meal metric as a single indicator of school need." Even if the study were relevant, it did not consider the influence of ESOL. Only 16% of the children living in public housing in the study were Hispanic.

You can say that "the study is not relevant" as many times as you want, that won't make it true. It still gives us a lot of guidance on what are the FARMS levels that offer academic advantages. You think that there were no FARMS kids bused in the study? What difference would it make if you simply bus the FARMS kids to a more affluent school? There would be no advantages because the kids don't live in an integrated neighborhood?

Really? You don’t see a difference in the FARMS kids integrated in Fallsgrove, Town Center, etc.. compared to bussing a section of lower income kids in a few miles away from their own neighborhood school to increase another schools FARMS rate?

Well, for one, RP5 kids get bused to school, don't they? Are they going to a neighborhood school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Woodley Gardens has support of Mark Pierzchala. He already showed that he can get lots of older folks to testify to avoid having CG going to Beall. People like Mark Pierzchala are champions who will keep neighborhoods safe. Let's keep neighborhoods together and safe.

Mark made a mistake and it will bite him one way or another.

Ironically he did not help the WG cause.

Doubt it, Mark and option A have a lot of local community support. There is one neighborhood and outside groups that are pushing option E.

Problem with all those local community support is that it's coming due to unwillingness to change schools. No one wants to change school, but I am not sure if BOE is simply going to do whatever is popular.

I think the only showing actual unwillingness is CG3. I do see their pints with Option A and I do think the new numbers that addressed the missed Tower Oaks development increase RM5 in the low 90’s in just 5 years is something to closely consider. We really don’t want another boundary zoning issue in the next 5-10 years.

That said, I understand why some TB, RP, and Beall families are asking not to be moved. They are being moved further and in many cases out on an island alone surrounding by neighbors all going to the local school. RP5 has been screwed from the beginning and now being told if they don’t move further, they are elitists. B5 and 6 with these N and S cut ups for no reason than Hungerford liked them. RP4 going miles away instead of the school across their street. RP5 thinking they are going to walk to a brand new school may have to be the only neighborhood moved and bussed. And of course T 2 and T5 are really the ones with the most to lose. Only 1 from their school and community center and they might be on busses 30min to TWO separate schools they know no one, many who don’t speak their language and FARMS parents struggling to even to be part of a community 5 miles away.

So while I think WG just doesn’t want to move because they like their community and IB, (and not that they are anti-Beall) they raised very valid points with new developments and not pushing everyone down county when that is where 90% of the new housing units are going. I absolutely do not want to go thru this again and my section isn’t even involved. I can’t imagine how stressful this has been. Not to mention how idiotic amCPS and the BOE are.

Woodley gardens had Posters saying " Don't send our kids to overcrowded Beall"? CG is at 129% capacity. Posters were shared in Beall PTA meeting and you had to be there to see how Beall parents felt.

It was very insulting and clearly WG thinks that attending Beall is beneath them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Woodley gardens had Posters saying " Don't send our kids to overcrowded Beall"? CG is at 129% capacity. Posters were shared in Beall PTA meeting and you had to be there to see how Beall parents felt.

It was very insulting and clearly WG thinks that attending Beall is beneath them.

I will be not surprised if Mark Pierzchala asked WG residents to have such posters. He wants to protect WG neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I do think the new numbers that addressed the missed Tower Oaks development increase RM5 in the low 90’s in just 5 years is something to closely consider. We really don’t want another boundary zoning issue in the next 5-10 years.

Tower Oaks is a non-issue. Since it doesn't exist yet, the board could easily decide to zone it to Ritchie Park, either in the future or now. The BOE needs to consider the near term (0-5 yrs) impact in the cluster for making their decision. There are simply too many uncertainties with other capital plans and actual demographic changes as a result of development to short-change the near term in hopes of avoiding a long term problem.

Ritchie Park is about 96% capacity in ever option but sure give us another new community. Fallsgrove should have went Lakewood and Park Potomac to Beverly Farms who is what 83% capacity while we have 6 portables. Both are closer yet we are always the highest in capacity and given the new developments.

That development is RIGHT across the street to RM5 and breaking ground in the Spring. It better get zoned there. The whole point in avoiding the chopped up neighborhoods is to under-enroll the schools who will have the most development. Beall and RM5.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read Schwartz's paper. As has been pointed out on this board repeatedly, the study is not relevant to the situation of the cluster; it is about the placement of public housing. Additionally, poverty ? FARMS, and Schwartz further states, "The differences suggest the shortcoming of the free and reduced-price meal metric as a single indicator of school need." Even if the study were relevant, it did not consider the influence of ESOL. Only 16% of the children living in public housing in the study were Hispanic.

You can say that "the study is not relevant" as many times as you want, that won't make it true. It still gives us a lot of guidance on what are the FARMS levels that offer academic advantages. You think that there were no FARMS kids bused in the study? What difference would it make if you simply bus the FARMS kids to a more affluent school? There would be no advantages because the kids don't live in an integrated neighborhood?

Really? You don’t see a difference in the FARMS kids integrated in Fallsgrove, Town Center, etc.. compared to bussing a section of lower income kids in a few miles away from their own neighborhood school to increase another schools FARMS rate?

Well, for one, RP5 kids get bused to school, don't they? Are they going to a neighborhood school?

No, they were bumped from the Wootton cluster after the community broke ground and people paid non-refundable plot deposits. They absolutely should be going to a neighborhood school. They got screwed and had no one to fight. Then they will be screwed again if they bus them even further. Every Wootton ES is projected to have 80 to 200 unfilled seats in the next few years if not right now. That is the cluster they should be in and I hope once Crown gets built, they will move them closer instead of using them as an experiment or afterthought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Walking or taking a bus has no impact on bridging the achievement gaps.

Providing FARMS kids a school with less poverty does have an impact on achievements.

RP shouldn't be made a haven for rich folks here. It's a part of RM cluster. MCPS should continue using RP to provide good environment for FARMs kids .

There are lots of schools where kids take bus to another school rather than walking as long as MCPS sees fit. MCPS needs to focus on bridging the achievement gaps and not take this protecting neighborhood of Woodley garden seriously. Woodley Garden doesn't need any protection and Beall has a bit higher FARMs, but WG will be fine even in Beall.

Please post all the MCPS elementary schools that bus walkable kids to a further school “as MCPS sees fit.” The BOE couldn’t come up with one. So I am curious of your list. Patiently waiting....

Your don't have to patibly wait for anyone. Some one posted in this thread itself. Here is one example in nearby neighborhood.


Stop # 3 TRAILRIDGE DR AND BENTRIDGE AVE - Buses kids to Beverly Farms elementary.


Walking distance to Cold Spring is 0.5 miles.

Incorrect.

That area is not deemed walkable because they go thru the major electric towers. It is not considered a neighborhood at that point and is a danger. They would have to be bussed in and Cold Spring does not have busses. The entire school is walkable.

So instead of being bussed 0.7 miles to Cold Spring, they are bussed 0.9 miles to Beverly Farms across the street. Always have been.

Both schools are less than a mile away, both are under 80% capacity and both have less than 3% FARMS. Beverly Farms is a much bigger brand new school. But again, those kids are not walkable. I am less than a mile from my school but not walkable because of a major road.

Still patiently waiting for all of these schools that the BOE moved walkable kids to schools further away. Can you post a list? Thanks. Oh and tell me which ones remove FARMS kids from walking to a school purposely to get bussed a few miles away instead. You know, to even out FARMS rates, right? Thanks!

I am not the poster, but if you underi impression that SES level mix is not in BOE mind then I have a moon to sell you. Just look at all weird boundaries all across MCPS.

Most of the boundaries have to do with capacity issues and not FARMS. New developments and moving them further than overfilled schools and restructuring new ones when they are rebuilt.

I am still waiting for the person to post all of these schools that bus kids out of a walkable neighborhood school to a further school?

If everyone is okay with RP2 getting bussed, why don’t we just move Hungerford out to Twinbrook to assist with easening FARMS. Maybe RP1 or B1? They wouldn’t mind right. That walk is SO tough. I bet they would prefer a 15-20min bus ride away instead. How about CG1 instead of CG3 moving. Walking shouldn’t matter, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Ritchie Park is about 96% capacity in ever option but sure give us another new community.

RP5 ( Fallsgrove) has 459 new housing proposed. RP2 has zero new housing coming up. Why not keep RP2 instead of RP5?

If RP is 96% in every option then it makes no sense to put RP5 in RP from capacity perspective. I have not paid attention to RP earlier. I was only focused on my school CG.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If everyone is okay with RP2 getting bussed, why don’t we just move Hungerford out to Twinbrook to assist with easening FARMS. Maybe RP1 or B1? They wouldn’t mind right. That walk is SO tough. I bet they would prefer a 15-20min bus ride away instead. How about CG1 instead of CG3 moving. Walking shouldn’t matter, right?

Only RP2 should decide if they are ok to be bussed or they want to walk. It doesn't make difference to any other zone if RP2 walks or gets bussed.

Everyone else is just using Walk vs Bus to make case for whatever outcome they want to see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Really? You don’t see a difference in the FARMS kids integrated in Fallsgrove, Town Center, etc.. compared to bussing a section of lower income kids in a few miles away from their own neighborhood school to increase another schools FARMS rate?

Well, for one, RP5 kids get bused to school, don't they? Are they going to a neighborhood school?

No, they were bumped from the Wootton cluster after the community broke ground and people paid non-refundable plot deposits. They absolutely should be going to a neighborhood school. They got screwed and had no one to fight. Then they will be screwed again if they bus them even further. Every Wootton ES is projected to have 80 to 200 unfilled seats in the next few years if not right now. That is the cluster they should be in and I hope once Crown gets built, they will move them closer instead of using them as an experiment or afterthought.
Some people on this board really like reductio ad absurdum fallacy. Or maybe they haven't heard of it in the first place and keep falling in the same thought trap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If everyone is okay with RP2 getting bussed, why don’t we just move Hungerford out to Twinbrook to assist with easening FARMS. Maybe RP1 or B1? They wouldn’t mind right. That walk is SO tough. I bet they would prefer a 15-20min bus ride away instead. How about CG1 instead of CG3 moving. Walking shouldn’t matter, right?

Only RP2 should decide if they are ok to be bussed or they want to walk. It doesn't make difference to any other zone if RP2 walks or gets bussed.

Everyone else is just using Walk vs Bus to make case for whatever outcome they want to see.

They can definitely make their preference known. It doesn't mean they will end up doing what they want. The same way as CG3 will not end up in CGES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If everyone is okay with RP2 getting bussed, why don’t we just move Hungerford out to Twinbrook to assist with easening FARMS. Maybe RP1 or B1? They wouldn’t mind right. That walk is SO tough. I bet they would prefer a 15-20min bus ride away instead. How about CG1 instead of CG3 moving. Walking shouldn’t matter, right?

Only RP2 should decide if they are ok to be bussed or they want to walk. It doesn't make difference to any other zone if RP2 walks or gets bussed.

Everyone else is just using Walk vs Bus to make case for whatever outcome they want to see.

Just like CG3 should be the only one to decide if they want to stay at CG or move to Beall?? And like RP5 should decide if they wan to be bused further to RM ES 5?? Lots of people are fine telling other zones whether or not they should move, too. There are families in RP2 who want to walk to the new school and families in RP2 who want to stay at Ritchie Park. The decision is ultimately up to the BoE, not RP2, not any other zone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, they were bumped from the Wootton cluster after the community broke ground and people paid non-refundable plot deposits. They absolutely should be going to a neighborhood school. They got screwed and had no one to fight. Then they will be screwed again if they bus them even further. Every Wootton ES is projected to have 80 to 200 unfilled seats in the next few years if not right now. That is the cluster they should be in and I hope once Crown gets built, they will move them closer instead of using them as an experiment or afterthought.

That happened to the original owners. How many original owners still have kids in elementary?