Option B Alternate - Adding extra ES to WJ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to move chunks of Kensington to Einstein finally.

+1

That may happen when the elementary school boundary study takes place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wheaton Woods family here. I’m ashamed of you people who don’t want my kids going to school at Woodward. Sorry we don’t make as much money, but Wheaton was over crowded. Grateful for Superintendent leadership here

Viers Mill family here and I agree. You are all shameful racists acting like you are trying to do us a favor by sending us to WJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wheaton Woods family here. I’m ashamed of you people who don’t want my kids going to school at Woodward. Sorry we don’t make as much money, but Wheaton was over crowded. Grateful for Superintendent leadership here

Viers Mill family here and I agree. You are all shameful racists acting like you are trying to do us a favor by sending us to WJ.

+1 I’ma VM family too and disgusted my kids will need go to school with these snobs at Farmland. I don’t want you either. Trying to use my family as a pawn for your property value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They left Woodlin at Einstein as a new island. That was to balance FARMS.

They can create islands for Wheaton Woods or Viers Mill to go to WJ and send all of Garrett Park to Woodward for the same reason.

Those articulation splits? Prime candidates for rezoning with the upcoming elementary boundary study.

But see the dark black line? The one separating regions? This is among the places they went wrong, not allowing any swap of elementary catchments that would cross that line. Nothing from WJ to Whitman, of course, or swaps with BCC (cue MC Hammer). Totally unnecessary, as the line could have been drawn with the same high schools after figuring out a better rezoning articulation.

Same shoot-yourself-in-the-foot constraint on the Crown study. Not to mention the failure at any point to combine the studies to allow logical swaps between, say, Churchill and Whitman, or RM and Woodward, or...

Switching 2 elmentary schools to WJ at the 11th hour to please Farmland families who bought in the wrong neighborhood is arbitrary and capricious. This faced a year of notice and comment. Everyone knew Woodward was taking on some DCC, not WJ

This iteration was presented at the 11th hour. The original Option B had Viers Mill at Woodward. His recommendation added Wheaton Woods as well which drove up the utilization and FARM rates at Woodward higher.

[Anonymous]

GP family. We want what the Superintendent proposed. We will testify as such. Keep us out of your fight, Luxmanor and Farmland. We aren’t your chess piece.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They left Woodlin at Einstein as a new island. That was to balance FARMS.

They can create islands for Wheaton Woods or Viers Mill to go to WJ and send all of Garrett Park to Woodward for the same reason.

Those articulation splits? Prime candidates for rezoning with the upcoming elementary boundary study.

But see the dark black line? The one separating regions? This is among the places they went wrong, not allowing any swap of elementary catchments that would cross that line. Nothing from WJ to Whitman, of course, or swaps with BCC (cue MC Hammer). Totally unnecessary, as the line could have been drawn with the same high schools after figuring out a better rezoning articulation.

Same shoot-yourself-in-the-foot constraint on the Crown study. Not to mention the failure at any point to combine the studies to allow logical swaps between, say, Churchill and Whitman, or RM and Woodward, or...

Switching 2 elmentary schools to WJ at the 11th hour to please Farmland families who bought in the wrong neighborhood is arbitrary and capricious. This faced a year of notice and comment. Everyone knew Woodward was taking on some DCC, not WJ

This iteration was presented at the 11th hour. The original Option B had Viers Mill at Woodward. His recommendation added Wheaton Woods as well which drove up the utilization and FARM rates at Woodward higher.

But it solved issues at Wheaton. And Woodward is still 10% under capacity. You have your new construction and below county avg and region avg FARMS. You were always going to be Woodward

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They left Woodlin at Einstein as a new island. That was to balance FARMS.

They can create islands for Wheaton Woods or Viers Mill to go to WJ and send all of Garrett Park to Woodward for the same reason.

Those articulation splits? Prime candidates for rezoning with the upcoming elementary boundary study.

But see the dark black line? The one separating regions? This is among the places they went wrong, not allowing any swap of elementary catchments that would cross that line. Nothing from WJ to Whitman, of course, or swaps with BCC (cue MC Hammer). Totally unnecessary, as the line could have been drawn with the same high schools after figuring out a better rezoning articulation.

Same shoot-yourself-in-the-foot constraint on the Crown study. Not to mention the failure at any point to combine the studies to allow logical swaps between, say, Churchill and Whitman, or RM and Woodward, or...

Switching 2 elmentary schools to WJ at the 11th hour to please Farmland families who bought in the wrong neighborhood is arbitrary and capricious. This faced a year of notice and comment. Everyone knew Woodward was taking on some DCC, not WJ

This iteration was presented at the 11th hour. The original Option B had Viers Mill at Woodward. His recommendation added Wheaton Woods as well which drove up the utilization and FARM rates at Woodward higher.

Sounds like one minor tweak to one of the proposals. Everyone knew he could change the options slightly. Sorry it isn’t in your preference because you don’t like poor people

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to move chunks of Kensington to Einstein finally.

+1

That may happen when the elementary school boundary study takes place.

The elementary school boundary study will be changing elementary school boundaries (and possibly a few middle school boundaries if middle schools get closed as part of the ES boundary study.). High school boundaries are not planned to be part of the scope of that boundary study, so they will not change.

[Anonymous]

Farmland and Luxmanor cry babies should foul us on their fashion design and video game magnets instead. Arts magnet is their real problem

[Anonymous]

Curious why those in the new WJ cluster don't want WW or VM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Curious why those in the new WJ cluster don't want WW or VM?

Whataboutism.

This is about new Woodward not wanting WW and VM and trying to punt them away. They are the ones who are clamoring to change the recommendation from the Superintendent.

New WJ is old WJ. They are content with their status quo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious why those in the new WJ cluster don't want WW or VM?

Whataboutism.

This is about new Woodward not wanting WW and VM and trying to punt them away. They are the ones who are clamoring to change the recommendation from the Superintendent.

New WJ is old WJ. They are content with their status quo.

You mean you are content with the status quo. And by status quo you mean trimming down number of minorities that surround you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious why those in the new WJ cluster don't want WW or VM?

Whataboutism.

This is about new Woodward not wanting WW and VM and trying to punt them away. They are the ones who are clamoring to change the recommendation from the Superintendent.

New WJ is old WJ. They are content with their status quo.

You mean you are content with the status quo. And by status quo you mean trimming down number of minorities that surround you.

No. That is you projecting. Like the change dot org petitioners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope so. I am disgusted by Taylor's proposal and by everyone that supports that racist BS

What’s racist is being opposed to black and brown kids and starting a change.org petition to draw in more white kids when it will barely change the FARMS data. Just be clear: you’re upset about the potential affects on your Tilden Woods house but want to use catch words like parity and equity because you’re too afraid to say it

Wait, since when is it wrong to care about property values?! Should one community sustain all of the impact to property value when the neighboring community does not? Is it not ok to ask that question?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope so. I am disgusted by Taylor's proposal and by everyone that supports that racist BS

What’s racist is being opposed to black and brown kids and starting a change.org petition to draw in more white kids when it will barely change the FARMS data. Just be clear: you’re upset about the potential affects on your Tilden Woods house but want to use catch words like parity and equity because you’re too afraid to say it

Wait, since when is it wrong to care about property values?! Should one community sustain all of the impact to property value when the neighboring community does not? Is it not ok to ask that question?

Yes you guys bought on the wrong hood. It’s capitalism. Win some lose some. Location location location

Though the BOE did not have this as one of the criteria so take it to the real estate forum. They won’t save you