Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Exactly. Many want to walk and want the new school. Some don’t want to leave because it is a change they currently don’t want. Just like CG3, RP5, B5, T2/5, etc... Many people don’t like change. IHowever, deciding to bus a walkable area because a few prefer the comfort of no change isn’t a good decision. Bussing kids further past a few schools isn’t a good decision either.

I wish RP just had 20% FARMS no matter what so that RP2 neighborhood doesn’t get carved out of RM5. It will serve them well, even if some kids just want to stay in the school they know now. I think they will regret the other neighbors around them going to the new school and community center. They will forever be the outcasts and I believe they will hold not so good feelings towards Fireside for being the issue that bumped them from the school a few years down the line or even as early as tomorrow. My gut is telling me the board will pick E. I don’t think it is the right choice but with everyone harping on RP getting 7% many other zones are going to get bumped from the school they wanted to stay in to bring RP up to the 2nd highest FARMS in the cluster. Pretty sad for B5, RP5, CG3, RP2/6, etc... but those focused on FARMS and bussing kids in to do it will be happy.

I think BOE will go with D. E is not a good alternative. Yes, most parents don't want to change schools, but boundary is not about those parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Exactly. Many want to walk and want the new school. Some don’t want to leave because it is a change they currently don’t want. Just like CG3, RP5, B5, T2/5, etc... Many people don’t like change. IHowever, deciding to bus a walkable area because a few prefer the comfort of no change isn’t a good decision. Bussing kids further past a few schools isn’t a good decision either.

I wish RP just had 20% FARMS no matter what so that RP2 neighborhood doesn’t get carved out of RM5. It will serve them well, even if some kids just want to stay in the school they know now. I think they will regret the other neighbors around them going to the new school and community center. They will forever be the outcasts and I believe they will hold not so good feelings towards Fireside for being the issue that bumped them from the school a few years down the line or even as early as tomorrow. My gut is telling me the board will pick E. I don’t think it is the right choice but with everyone harping on RP getting 7% many other zones are going to get bumped from the school they wanted to stay in to bring RP up to the 2nd highest FARMS in the cluster. Pretty sad for B5, RP5, CG3, RP2/6, etc... but those focused on FARMS and bussing kids in to do it will be happy.

I think BOE will go with D. E is not a good alternative. Yes, most parents don't want to change schools, but boundary is not about those parents.

D has CG over capacity; creates an island for B5; and TB loses Title 1 status but still have very high FARMs. TB becomes the biggest loser here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people on this board don't understand logical fallacies. In what world the situation of RP2 is similar to that of RP1 or B1?

They are all designated walk-zones by MCPS.

Do you have any schoo right in the middle of RP2?

It is only zoned “not around RM5” because it was already a section removed from Beall awhile back and had to be labeled RP2 since it now goes to RP. If it was still in Beall it would be known as part of B2 and it would 100% be the new walkable zone of RM5.

Look at the size of B2 compared to CG1, B1, TB1? Remove the RP2 label and blend it with B2 and it still won’t be the size of CG1 or TB1. Because RP2 SHOULD be part of B2 walkable area.

So why not remove parts or cut up parts of CG1 to another school? A part of B1 or T1. It is absolutely no different.

[Anonymous]

C and D are off the table They aren’t going to give up TB Title 1 status, bus those kids out, and make other schools over capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: They will forever be the outcasts and I believe they will hold not so good feelings towards Fireside for being the issue that bumped them from the school a few years down the line or even as early as tomorrow. My gut is telling me the board will pick E. I don’t think it is the right choice but with everyone harping on RP getting 7% many other zones are going to get bumped from the school they wanted to stay in to bring RP up to the 2nd highest FARMS in the cluster. Pretty sad for B5, RP5, CG3, RP2/6, etc... but those focused on FARMS and bussing kids in to do it will be happy.

Wanting to stay in current school for the next 3-4 years is such a huge deal for zones like B5, CG3 etc that they will make Fireside an outcast? That's very low. I don't think fireside will be an outcast anywhere.

I am sure that no matter what BOE decides, no zone or apartment will be an outcast here. Boundary is anyway not about keeping current kids in current school for the next few years. Boundary is about what's best for the next 25 years. Even if B5, CG3 etc treat Fireside Apt kids as an outcast, those parents will be out of elementary in few years. New parents will just come with a new boundary with no history attached. Anyway, I doubt that anyone will be an outcast here. That will be simply going too low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:its going to be option E for sure. having a school with 7 percent farms within the cluster completely ignores 1 of the 4 criteria in the FAARA or whatever its called.

? That's just ONE of FOUR criteria. Proximity and scalability are two of the four criteria. Is FARMs criteria more important than the others?

Capacity, proximity, stability and demography. All 4 have been balanced very well in alternative D.

E balances all 4 factors only in 4 schools and not in 5 schools so not a great alternative.

A and B focus on proximity exclusively.

MCPS needs to decide if they want to increase achievement gaps or decrease achievement gaps? MCPS has stated goal to narrow the achievements gap and only D looks like a good way to go here which will not have lots of kids bussing long distance.

A and B will widen the achievement gaps by keeping RP at 7% FARMs and not using it for helping as many FARMs students the school can help.

What is it with you and your continued posts about RP being 7% and not using it to help as many FARMS kids as it should. I mean there must be 50 posts on here of you saying the same line. Why didn’t you care that CG was 13% FARMS and TB was 70% all of these years?

No one wants to get bussed there for RP to help them. TB said no thanks and RP2 wants to walk to new school. And by bussing kids in to RP, moves other kids further too. You keep saying others are only focusing on proximity but that seems to be because it is the highest priority for everyone. FARMS and non FARMS families. If TB wants to stay local then RP2 should be allowed too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think BOE will go with D. E is not a good alternative. Yes, most parents don't want to change schools, but boundary is not about those parents.

D has CG over capacity; creates an island for B5; and TB loses Title 1 status but still have very high FARMs. TB becomes the biggest loser here.

D doesn't have any school at 100%. Keeping a school above 70% intentionally just to give them title 1 is not a good idea when you can have 52% FARMs.

Many boundaries in MCPS have islands. It's better to avoid it, but those islands anyway get bus service. Narrowing the achievement gaps should be the focus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: They will forever be the outcasts and I believe they will hold not so good feelings towards Fireside for being the issue that bumped them from the school a few years down the line or even as early as tomorrow. My gut is telling me the board will pick E. I don’t think it is the right choice but with everyone harping on RP getting 7% many other zones are going to get bumped from the school they wanted to stay in to bring RP up to the 2nd highest FARMS in the cluster. Pretty sad for B5, RP5, CG3, RP2/6, etc... but those focused on FARMS and bussing kids in to do it will be happy.

Wanting to stay in current school for the next 3-4 years is such a huge deal for zones like B5, CG3 etc that they will make Fireside an outcast? That's very low. I don't think fireside will be an outcast anywhere.

I am sure that no matter what BOE decides, no zone or apartment will be an outcast here. Boundary is anyway not about keeping current kids in current school for the next few years. Boundary is about what's best for the next 25 years. Even if B5, CG3 etc treat Fireside Apt kids as an outcast, those parents will be out of elementary in few years. New parents will just come with a new boundary with no history attached. Anyway, I doubt that anyone will be an outcast here. That will be simply going too low.

What are you talking about? The entire RP2 zone will be the outcasts since the entire neighborhoods surrounding them go to and walk to RP5 and soon the community center too. And people in RP2 (not other zones) will hold ill feelings towards Fireside for removing them from their new neighborhood school they should be walking to. If it wasn’t for Fireside, they would be walking to new school. Trust me. People are very aware why that section is carved out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
D has CG over capacity; creates an island for B5; and TB loses Title 1 status but still have very high FARMs. TB becomes the biggest loser here.

D doesn't have any school at 100%. Keeping a school above 70% intentionally just to give them title 1 is not a good idea when you can have 52% FARMs.

Many boundaries in MCPS have islands. It's better to avoid it, but those islands anyway get bus service. Narrowing the achievement gaps should be the focus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think BOE will go with D. E is not a good alternative. Yes, most parents don't want to change schools, but boundary is not about those parents.

D has CG over capacity; creates an island for B5; and TB loses Title 1 status but still have very high FARMs. TB becomes the biggest loser here.

D doesn't have any school at 100%. Keeping a school above 70% intentionally just to give them title 1 is not a good idea when you can have 52% FARMs.

Many boundaries in MCPS have islands. It's better to avoid it, but those islands anyway get bus service. Narrowing the achievement gaps should be the focus.

You are a clueless troll

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Why didn’t you care that CG was 13% FARMS and TB was 70% all of these years?

Why are you assuming that no one cared about it, but you can only make difference when boundaries are getting redrawn.

Anonymous wrote:

No one wants to get bussed there for RP to help them. TB said no thanks and RP2 wants to walk to new school.

Only if it was true. Many other zones have been making claims as if it's an easy 0.1-0.2 Miles walk for RP2 kids. Go and talk to RP2 parents if you think that most parents want to walk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
D has CG over capacity.

D has CG under 100% in 2023-2024.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think BOE will go with D. E is not a good alternative. Yes, most parents don't want to change schools, but boundary is not about those parents.

D has CG over capacity; creates an island for B5; and TB loses Title 1 status but still have very high FARMs. TB becomes the biggest loser here.

D doesn't have any school at 100%. Keeping a school above 70% intentionally just to give them title 1 is not a good idea when you can have 52% FARMs.

Many boundaries in MCPS have islands. It's better to avoid it, but those islands anyway get bus service. Narrowing the achievement gaps should be the focus.

You are a clueless troll

Ah, so anyone not agreeing with you views becomes a troll?

[Anonymous]

Meaningless discussion here.

Mark Pierzchala is going to ensure that Woodley Garden is protected. Alternative A, here we come .....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think BOE will go with D. E is not a good alternative. Yes, most parents don't want to change schools, but boundary is not about those parents.

D has CG over capacity; creates an island for B5; and TB loses Title 1 status but still have very high FARMs. TB becomes the biggest loser here.

D doesn't have any school at 100%. Keeping a school above 70% intentionally just to give them title 1 is not a good idea when you can have 52% FARMs.

Many boundaries in MCPS have islands. It's better to avoid it, but those islands anyway get bus service. Narrowing the achievement gaps should be the focus.

You are a clueless troll

Ah, so anyone not agreeing with you views becomes a troll?

The Twinbrook community had several meetings last week, at least one of which was run by MCPS. Over 80 parents from the community emphatically lobbed for all areas of Twinbrook to remain together. Breaking off two hunks of 100 kids each and sending them to two separate schools and leaving the remaining 400 kids without the heavily subsidized before/after and summer care scares the community. Public transportation from those two zones requires 30 minutes one way including 15-20 minute walks since there is no service to Beall or RMES#5. The kids that get shipped out loose community before/after care as well plus the summer program since Twinbrook is no longer a Title I. Many feel that what they gain in FARMs rates of 52% at Twinbrook, 29.7% at Beall, and 28.8 (closer to 35% once CI is factored out) at the new school is far less than what they retain by staying at Twinbrook.

It also moves zone B5 to Twinbrook making them an Island from all of their walk-able neighbors. B5 is .5 miles from Beall, 1.5 miles from RMES#5, 1.6 miles from College Gardens 2.3 miles from RP, and 2.5 miles from Twinbrook. Similar to RP5 you are sending this zone to the furthest elementary school in the cluster. Many of the kids in B5 live in Rockville Towncenter in apartments and may not have access to private transportation either. Instead of a .5 mile walk to Beall, D would require a .5 mile walk to the metro, a metro ride, and a .5 mile walk to Twinbrook. Not as arduous as what the Twinbrook parents would have to do pick up a kid from aftercare but still challenging.

Alternative D serves one purpose, as demonstrated by how it was created....the board required Dr. Smith to come up with a plan that equalized FARMs, that was the primary driver in its creation after all the fuss that was raised when the incorrect FARMs #'s were reported in the Superintendent's first plan. FARMs is one part of one of the four criteria.