Boundary study (2025 )

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there any trusted data (not anecdotes) that demonstrate this correlation (and controls for other factors) in past re-boundary-ings?

What correlation are you talking about? The made up one about the BOE redrawing boundaries to focus only on demographics that the MAGA folks toss around on here and their Facebook groups?

Sorry for not quoting myself. I was asking about data that demonstrates a correlation of property values decreasing when a re-boundary-ing is performed. I don't really care about what contributes to the re-boundary-ing (demographics or whatever), I'm just looking for any data that shows property values change somehow in a causal manner based on adjusting lines in MC.

I doubt there is any such data. If you want to look for it, you could check the Cabin Branch neighborhood in Clarksburg. They were rezoned from Clarksburg HS to Seneca Valley several years ago, and there was a big outcry. But things seemed to have settled down since.

Cabin Branch here. I haven’t really seen a shift in property values, but I do know when it first happened, a few people were on the fence about buying here because of the school reassignments; and a few families moved out of the neighborhood. A lot of the hesitation came from concerns about the GS ratings of the new schools we were zoned for. That said, it's been interesting to see Seneca Valley High School’s ratings actually go up since the change and the new elementary school has recently brought in a bunch of younger families into the neighborhood.

There is always a firestorm with every boundary study and then things simmer down. It’s ridiculous because folks are complaining about overcrowding and lack of resource before a study is done. People are not happy no matter what, even when people are trying to help them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm honestly curious, given the demographics of MC, why anyone is anti-diversity in the context of this thread. This isn't a red state, this isn't the south. What is going on here? I appreciate and embrace the diversity in my kids' ES.

MoCo is one of the most racially diverse counties in the nation. Our schools are already incredibly diverse. Most people living here prioritize diversity already. So for MCPS to prioritize diversity over other goals in this study (when we already live in one of our nation’s most diverse counties) seems a little nuts.

Yeah, well, they aren't doing that.

I went to the meeting, and I don’t agree with you. There are 4 stated priorities. The first one is demographics, which they define as percent FARMS, percent EML, and percent race/ethnicity. See slide 51.

Yes, it was the first in the list of four but they said they were all weighted the same.

How long have your kids been MCPS? You can’t trust them. I promise you they will not all be weighted the same.

I've had kids in MCPS for 12 years and I'm an MCPS grad myself. To quote a PP, who gave a real example of MCPS prioritizing two of the other factors over diversity in a boundary study:

Yes. Check out the most recent boundary study done by MCPS, which was opening a new ES in Clarksburg. https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departmen...urges9boundarystudy/

You can see that there were six options. Of those, Option 4 did the most to increase diversity but the Superintendent recommended a slightly amended Option 1 that minimized disruption and maximized walkers.

Another example is the Westbrook/Somerset/Bethesda ES study, which is an interesting one because there was some actual demographic diversity in the study zone. Again, there were multiple options under consideration and again they did not pick the one that optimized diversity (Option 4), instead going with the option that maximized walkers and continuity (Option 1). Any changes to that zone would shift FARMS rates but the option they chose did not result in as drastic a swing as some of the options on the table. In the end, Westbrook went from 1% FARMS to 6% FARMS.

We can’t let facts get in the way of the maga fever dream that the BOE just wants to bus kids around because of dei

Exactly!!!! These people keep saying the same thing over and over even when the facts are showing them that none of the four factors are worth more than the other. If anything, it will likely prioritize walkers. They don't want to hear it.

It always prioritizes walkers because doing so impacts cost and resource usage positively and is environmentally friendly which helps with sustainability.

[Anonymous]

I’m less concerned about the boundary study and want more info on the County-wide Program Study.

The biggest impact on the boundary study is going to be understanding construction plans and getting a more realistic impact than has happened previously. Also understanding the impact of people potentially withdrawing from private school given all the government layoffs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m less concerned about the boundary study and want more info on the County-wide Program Study.

The biggest impact on the boundary study is going to be understanding construction plans and getting a more realistic impact than has happened previously. Also understanding the impact of people potentially withdrawing from private school given all the government layoffs.

Are the two that coordinated, or more importantly do they communicate what coordination has been done? There are literally a billion condos along Wisconsin Ave and other areas. What schools are those students who might end up living there attending? It has to be Whitman.

[Anonymous]

When will they post the recording or the slides?

[Anonymous]

If you are concerned about the boundary studies and how it will impact you and your community, join this Facebook group today!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/2168433996799135

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m less concerned about the boundary study and want more info on the County-wide Program Study.

The biggest impact on the boundary study is going to be understanding construction plans and getting a more realistic impact than has happened previously. Also understanding the impact of people potentially withdrawing from private school given all the government layoffs.

Also will cause people to leave the area.

[Anonymous]

Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

MCPS has never been good at following surveying best practices, so this isn't terribly surprising.

[Anonymous]

Isn’t MCPS spending a lot of money on a consultant to manage this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

MCPS has never been good at following surveying best practices, so this isn't terribly surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t MCPS spending a lot of money on a consultant to manage this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

MCPS has never been good at following surveying best practices, so this isn't terribly surprising.

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

Because of one right wingers' opinion?
You don’t say...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

Because of one right wingers' opinion?
You don’t say...

No, because of the survey's poor design.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

Because of one right wingers' opinion?
You don’t say...

No, because of the survey's poor design.

Anyone can fill it out.

Anyone can fill it out multiple times.

Enjoy!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the survey results aren't going to be very reliable.

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/08/can-the-mcps-online-boundary-survey-be-gamed/

Because of one right wingers' opinion?
You don’t say...

No, because of the survey's poor design.

Anyone can fill it out.

Anyone can fill it out multiple times.

Enjoy!

Which means it's not a good gauge of public opinion.