My gut feeling on 3/26 BOE vote

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the BOE votes yes, it’s a vote to hurt Brown Stations ES https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/

They really didn’t focus on how these last minute changes harmed Brown as well as Wheaton Woods. They weren’t giving us real proposals during the process just soliciting feedback, then showing their true hand at the end. I don’t think that is the way it should work.

This is a plan to close Ridgeview or Lakelands MS.

If you look at the Superintendent’s recommendation, it creates a situation in which all of the MSs are in the desired capacity range except Ridgeview and Lakelands which are both around 50% capacity. The projections for the 2029-30 school year of enrollment of Ridgeview + Lakelands = almost exactly 100% capacity at the Lakelands Park building.

This is Taylor’s plan for finding money for other initiatives, maintenance, etc. Close SSIMS and Ridgeview. Take the old Wootton building out of the running for construction and maintenance dollars.

I don’t know what ESs may be on the chopping block but it sure looks like Ridgeview is - with those kids getting moved to Lakelands Park.

At least SSIMS was honestly designated a closure. Closure is a process and MCPS is an LEA, local education authority, in a, SEA, state education authority. Maryland has regulations on public school closures. Part of that is where the LEA proposes to relocate students from the closed schools. This is the process on closure https://regulations.justia.com/states/maryland/title-13a/subtitle-02/chapter-13a-02-09/section-13a-02-09-01/

I posted about this issue previously. Relocation is just part of the closure. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/garrett/Board.nsf/files/CPQLA554A890/$file/COMAR%2013A.02.09%20-%20Closing%20of%20Schools.pdf

But it isn't a closure. It is a relocation.

[Anonymous]

The problem is that emptying out a middle school, significantly below 80%, while neighboring middle schools are much higher is counter to MCPS policy FAA factor stating that the goal is to conduct boundary studies to have schools between 80-100%. Zero effort towards balancing neighboring middle schools. The emptying out of is done with zero explanation as well, and only in the options in February 2026, restricting feedback. It would be an “improper relocation” it seems; especially if that fact is used against any/all of them in the fall in the next boundary study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the BOE votes yes, it’s a vote to hurt Brown Stations ES https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/

They really didn’t focus on how these last minute changes harmed Brown as well as Wheaton Woods. They weren’t giving us real proposals during the process just soliciting feedback, then showing their true hand at the end. I don’t think that is the way it should work.

This is a plan to close Ridgeview or Lakelands MS.

If you look at the Superintendent’s recommendation, it creates a situation in which all of the MSs are in the desired capacity range except Ridgeview and Lakelands which are both around 50% capacity. The projections for the 2029-30 school year of enrollment of Ridgeview + Lakelands = almost exactly 100% capacity at the Lakelands Park building.

This is Taylor’s plan for finding money for other initiatives, maintenance, etc. Close SSIMS and Ridgeview. Take the old Wootton building out of the running for construction and maintenance dollars.

I don’t know what ESs may be on the chopping block but it sure looks like Ridgeview is - with those kids getting moved to Lakelands Park.

At least SSIMS was honestly designated a closure. Closure is a process and MCPS is an LEA, local education authority, in a, SEA, state education authority. Maryland has regulations on public school closures. Part of that is where the LEA proposes to relocate students from the closed schools. This is the process on closure https://regulations.justia.com/states/maryland/title-13a/subtitle-02/chapter-13a-02-09/section-13a-02-09-01/

I posted about this issue previously. Relocation is just part of the closure. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/garrett/Board.nsf/files/CPQLA554A890/$file/COMAR%2013A.02.09%20-%20Closing%20of%20Schools.pdf

The end result of Wootton moving to Crown is a relocation; the entire student body of Wootton (with the boundary relocations) is moving to a completely new building. It's not merging into another school. The Save Wootton group will argue that it's a "de facto closure" or whatever, but it clearly meets the definition of a move rather than a closure. COMAR's probably a dead-end here.

Ridgeview, assuming it's closed and the student body is merged in with Lakelands Park, is clearly a closure, but will be part of the next round of boundary studies, which will include other closures (Cold Spring? DuFief? SSIMS?). Those will adhere to the MCPS policy for closures.

Whatever. Relocating can occur for closure, boundary changes, program location changes, and displacing students for construction/renovation of their geographically assigned school. Call it holding school or swing space, means the same. 100% of students re-assigned from Wootton will not return to the Wootton building. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/how-schools-make-swing-spaces-feel-like-home/2025/08#:~:text=Jason%20Washington%2C%20the%20associate%20superintendent,space%20to%20the%20home%20school%3F

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the BOE votes yes, it’s a vote to hurt Brown Stations ES https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/

They really didn’t focus on how these last minute changes harmed Brown as well as Wheaton Woods. They weren’t giving us real proposals during the process just soliciting feedback, then showing their true hand at the end. I don’t think that is the way it should work.

This is a plan to close Ridgeview or Lakelands MS.

If you look at the Superintendent’s recommendation, it creates a situation in which all of the MSs are in the desired capacity range except Ridgeview and Lakelands which are both around 50% capacity. The projections for the 2029-30 school year of enrollment of Ridgeview + Lakelands = almost exactly 100% capacity at the Lakelands Park building.

This is Taylor’s plan for finding money for other initiatives, maintenance, etc. Close SSIMS and Ridgeview. Take the old Wootton building out of the running for construction and maintenance dollars.

I don’t know what ESs may be on the chopping block but it sure looks like Ridgeview is - with those kids getting moved to Lakelands Park.

At least SSIMS was honestly designated a closure. Closure is a process and MCPS is an LEA, local education authority, in a, SEA, state education authority. Maryland has regulations on public school closures. Part of that is where the LEA proposes to relocate students from the closed schools. This is the process on closure https://regulations.justia.com/states/maryland/title-13a/subtitle-02/chapter-13a-02-09/section-13a-02-09-01/

I posted about this issue previously. Relocation is just part of the closure. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/garrett/Board.nsf/files/CPQLA554A890/$file/COMAR%2013A.02.09%20-%20Closing%20of%20Schools.pdf

The end result of Wootton moving to Crown is a relocation; the entire student body of Wootton (with the boundary relocations) is moving to a completely new building. It's not merging into another school. The Save Wootton group will argue that it's a "de facto closure" or whatever, but it clearly meets the definition of a move rather than a closure. COMAR's probably a dead-end here.

Ridgeview, assuming it's closed and the student body is merged in with Lakelands Park, is clearly a closure, but will be part of the next round of boundary studies, which will include other closures (Cold Spring? DuFief? SSIMS?). Those will adhere to the MCPS policy for closures.

Whatever. Relocating can occur for closure, boundary changes, program location changes, and displacing students for construction/renovation of their geographically assigned school. Call it holding school or swing space, means the same. 100% of students re-assigned from Wootton will not return to the Wootton building. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/how-schools-make-swing-spaces-feel-like-home/2025/08#:~:text=Jason%20Washington%2C%20the%20associate%20superintendent,space%20to%20the%20home%20school%3F

Correct. And it is not a technical closure under the cited regulations, therefore those requirements do not apply.

(And even if they did, they have been followed)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that emptying out a middle school, significantly below 80%, while neighboring middle schools are much higher is counter to MCPS policy FAA factor stating that the goal is to conduct boundary studies to have schools between 80-100%. Zero effort towards balancing neighboring middle schools. The emptying out of is done with zero explanation as well, and only in the options in February 2026, restricting feedback. It would be an “improper relocation” it seems; especially if that fact is used against any/all of them in the fall in the next boundary study

Honey, they don’t follow any of their own policies. It is rare that they adhere to any policy they themselves made. No one stops them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the BOE votes yes, it’s a vote to hurt Brown Stations ES https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/

They really didn’t focus on how these last minute changes harmed Brown as well as Wheaton Woods. They weren’t giving us real proposals during the process just soliciting feedback, then showing their true hand at the end. I don’t think that is the way it should work.

This is a plan to close Ridgeview or Lakelands MS.

If you look at the Superintendent’s recommendation, it creates a situation in which all of the MSs are in the desired capacity range except Ridgeview and Lakelands which are both around 50% capacity. The projections for the 2029-30 school year of enrollment of Ridgeview + Lakelands = almost exactly 100% capacity at the Lakelands Park building.

This is Taylor’s plan for finding money for other initiatives, maintenance, etc. Close SSIMS and Ridgeview. Take the old Wootton building out of the running for construction and maintenance dollars.

I don’t know what ESs may be on the chopping block but it sure looks like Ridgeview is - with those kids getting moved to Lakelands Park.

At least SSIMS was honestly designated a closure. Closure is a process and MCPS is an LEA, local education authority, in a, SEA, state education authority. Maryland has regulations on public school closures. Part of that is where the LEA proposes to relocate students from the closed schools. This is the process on closure https://regulations.justia.com/states/maryland/title-13a/subtitle-02/chapter-13a-02-09/section-13a-02-09-01/

I posted about this issue previously. Relocation is just part of the closure. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/garrett/Board.nsf/files/CPQLA554A890/$file/COMAR%2013A.02.09%20-%20Closing%20of%20Schools.pdf

The end result of Wootton moving to Crown is a relocation; the entire student body of Wootton (with the boundary relocations) is moving to a completely new building. It's not merging into another school. The Save Wootton group will argue that it's a "de facto closure" or whatever, but it clearly meets the definition of a move rather than a closure. COMAR's probably a dead-end here.

Ridgeview, assuming it's closed and the student body is merged in with Lakelands Park, is clearly a closure, but will be part of the next round of boundary studies, which will include other closures (Cold Spring? DuFief? SSIMS?). Those will adhere to the MCPS policy for closures.

Whatever. Relocating can occur for closure, boundary changes, program location changes, and displacing students for construction/renovation of their geographically assigned school. Call it holding school or swing space, means the same. 100% of students re-assigned from Wootton will not return to the Wootton building. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/how-schools-make-swing-spaces-feel-like-home/2025/08#:~:text=Jason%20Washington%2C%20the%20associate%20superintendent,space%20to%20the%20home%20school%3F

Correct. And it is not a technical closure under the cited regulations, therefore those requirements do not apply.

(And even if they did, they have been followed)

It is and they weren’t. The chronology f events doesn’t fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that emptying out a middle school, significantly below 80%, while neighboring middle schools are much higher is counter to MCPS policy FAA factor stating that the goal is to conduct boundary studies to have schools between 80-100%. Zero effort towards balancing neighboring middle schools. The emptying out of is done with zero explanation as well, and only in the options in February 2026, restricting feedback. It would be an “improper relocation” it seems; especially if that fact is used against any/all of them in the fall in the next boundary study

MCPS has a lot of latitude, since Policy FAA also has 3 other criteria and you can't satisfy them all.

Demographic Characteristics of Student Population
Geography
Stability of School Assignments Over Time
Facilities utilization

Some have trade-offs vs. others. As we found out with Option 3, trying to make an equally diverse student population completely undermined geography.

So, Lakelands Park and Ridgeview are below target, but none of the other middle schools are above target. Similarly, only Winston Churchill is above target.

[Anonymous]

So, what’s everyone’s plan for how to celebrate or mourn tomorrows vote?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, what’s everyone’s plan for how to celebrate or mourn tomorrows vote?

More racist posts on an anonymous board!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that emptying out a middle school, significantly below 80%, while neighboring middle schools are much higher is counter to MCPS policy FAA factor stating that the goal is to conduct boundary studies to have schools between 80-100%. Zero effort towards balancing neighboring middle schools. The emptying out of is done with zero explanation as well, and only in the options in February 2026, restricting feedback. It would be an “improper relocation” it seems; especially if that fact is used against any/all of them in the fall in the next boundary study

MCPS has a lot of latitude, since Policy FAA also has 3 other criteria and you can't satisfy them all.

Demographic Characteristics of Student Population
Geography
Stability of School Assignments Over Time
Facilities utilization

Some have trade-offs vs. others. As we found out with Option 3, trying to make an equally diverse student population completely undermined geography.

So, Lakelands Park and Ridgeview are below target, but none of the other middle schools are above target. Similarly, only Winston Churchill is above target.

The logic of “we can’t satisfy all 4 factors, so we can do anything we want for low utilization to any degree” is still against policy FAA it seems. Having four different middle schools at 60% utilization or below while neighboring ones are all above 80% is a clear violation of their own policy that says the 80-100% range should occur “whenever possible.” The policy does not state it would be okay to be 60% or below, “as long as others are below 100%.” They make no effort to even explain the imbalanced development in Feb 2026 where utilization is significantly lower than neighboring middle schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, what’s everyone’s plan for how to celebrate or mourn tomorrows vote?

More racist posts on an anonymous board!!!

Yeahhhbbh boi let’s goooo! Someone teach the Nextdoor and FB trolls how to play over here. It’s more fun under the cloak of anonymity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem is that emptying out a middle school, significantly below 80%, while neighboring middle schools are much higher is counter to MCPS policy FAA factor stating that the goal is to conduct boundary studies to have schools between 80-100%. Zero effort towards balancing neighboring middle schools. The emptying out of is done with zero explanation as well, and only in the options in February 2026, restricting feedback. It would be an “improper relocation” it seems; especially if that fact is used against any/all of them in the fall in the next boundary study

MCPS has a lot of latitude, since Policy FAA also has 3 other criteria and you can't satisfy them all.

Demographic Characteristics of Student Population
Geography
Stability of School Assignments Over Time
Facilities utilization

Some have trade-offs vs. others. As we found out with Option 3, trying to make an equally diverse student population completely undermined geography.

So, Lakelands Park and Ridgeview are below target, but none of the other middle schools are above target. Similarly, only Winston Churchill is above target.

The logic of “we can’t satisfy all 4 factors, so we can do anything we want for low utilization to any degree” is still against policy FAA it seems. Having four different middle schools at 60% utilization or below while neighboring ones are all above 80% is a clear violation of their own policy that says the 80-100% range should occur “whenever possible.” The policy does not state it would be okay to be 60% or below, “as long as others are below 100%.” They make no effort to even explain the imbalanced development in Feb 2026 where utilization is significantly lower than neighboring middle schools.

The entire Policy FAA is full of "shoulds" over the 4 different factors; MCPS has the leeway to figure out how best to accomplish all 4. Just because the recommendation doesn't meet one of the 4 that has an actual number attached to it for 2 middle schools, doesn't mean that the recommendation didn't follow Policy FAA.

Judge in the Clarksburg boundary lawsuit mentioned that a similar requirement for the first factor was "aspirational" and not "mandatory" and that the policy FAA direct consideration of "all 4 factors".

https://marylandpublicschools.org/stateboard/Documents/legalopinions/2020/122020/VanHerksen-et-al.Op.No.20-45.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the BOE votes yes, it’s a vote to hurt Brown Stations ES https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/

They really didn’t focus on how these last minute changes harmed Brown as well as Wheaton Woods. They weren’t giving us real proposals during the process just soliciting feedback, then showing their true hand at the end. I don’t think that is the way it should work.

This is a plan to close Ridgeview or Lakelands MS.

If you look at the Superintendent’s recommendation, it creates a situation in which all of the MSs are in the desired capacity range except Ridgeview and Lakelands which are both around 50% capacity. The projections for the 2029-30 school year of enrollment of Ridgeview + Lakelands = almost exactly 100% capacity at the Lakelands Park building.

This is Taylor’s plan for finding money for other initiatives, maintenance, etc. Close SSIMS and Ridgeview. Take the old Wootton building out of the running for construction and maintenance dollars.

I don’t know what ESs may be on the chopping block but it sure looks like Ridgeview is - with those kids getting moved to Lakelands Park.

At least SSIMS was honestly designated a closure. Closure is a process and MCPS is an LEA, local education authority, in a, SEA, state education authority. Maryland has regulations on public school closures. Part of that is where the LEA proposes to relocate students from the closed schools. This is the process on closure https://regulations.justia.com/states/maryland/title-13a/subtitle-02/chapter-13a-02-09/section-13a-02-09-01/

I posted about this issue previously. Relocation is just part of the closure. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/garrett/Board.nsf/files/CPQLA554A890/$file/COMAR%2013A.02.09%20-%20Closing%20of%20Schools.pdf

Are you the weird person who thinks Wootton is being closed?

It's funny that you keep pointing to SSIMS, because that provides a perfect example of why the Wootton move is nothing like a closure.

If/when SSIMS closes, they'll close the school, let all the teachers and staff go and send them off to apply for jobs anywhere else in the county, all SSIMS-specific classes and extracurriculars and policies and practices will vanish, students will be split up and assigned who knows where and become part of brand new and often radically different schools, etc.

Does that sound anything like what is happening to Wootton? Not at all, right? Wootton is moving a couple miles and a small number of kids are changing (in exactly the same way as tons of other schools are having boundaries change right now, and not complaining that the boundaries shifts radically change their school and identity because it is truly not a big deal), but other than that literally everything will be the same. Same name, same leadership, same teachers and staff, same classes, same extracurriculars, same policies, same everything.

Do you realize it makes you sound like a 5 year old when you pretend that a short move and a minor boundary change is anything like what school communities being wiped out of existence in a real school closure have to deal with?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the BOE votes yes, it’s a vote to hurt Brown Stations ES https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/

They really didn’t focus on how these last minute changes harmed Brown as well as Wheaton Woods. They weren’t giving us real proposals during the process just soliciting feedback, then showing their true hand at the end. I don’t think that is the way it should work.

This is a plan to close Ridgeview or Lakelands MS.

If you look at the Superintendent’s recommendation, it creates a situation in which all of the MSs are in the desired capacity range except Ridgeview and Lakelands which are both around 50% capacity. The projections for the 2029-30 school year of enrollment of Ridgeview + Lakelands = almost exactly 100% capacity at the Lakelands Park building.

This is Taylor’s plan for finding money for other initiatives, maintenance, etc. Close SSIMS and Ridgeview. Take the old Wootton building out of the running for construction and maintenance dollars.

I don’t know what ESs may be on the chopping block but it sure looks like Ridgeview is - with those kids getting moved to Lakelands Park.

At least SSIMS was honestly designated a closure. Closure is a process and MCPS is an LEA, local education authority, in a, SEA, state education authority. Maryland has regulations on public school closures. Part of that is where the LEA proposes to relocate students from the closed schools. This is the process on closure https://regulations.justia.com/states/maryland/title-13a/subtitle-02/chapter-13a-02-09/section-13a-02-09-01/

I posted about this issue previously. Relocation is just part of the closure. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/garrett/Board.nsf/files/CPQLA554A890/$file/COMAR%2013A.02.09%20-%20Closing%20of%20Schools.pdf

Are you the weird person who thinks Wootton is being closed?

It's funny that you keep pointing to SSIMS, because that provides a perfect example of why the Wootton move is nothing like a closure.

If/when SSIMS closes, they'll close the school, let all the teachers and staff go and send them off to apply for jobs anywhere else in the county, all SSIMS-specific classes and extracurriculars and policies and practices will vanish, students will be split up and assigned who knows where and become part of brand new and often radically different schools, etc.

Does that sound anything like what is happening to Wootton? Not at all, right? Wootton is moving a couple miles and a small number of kids are changing (in exactly the same way as tons of other schools are having boundaries change right now, and not complaining that the boundaries shifts radically change their school and identity because it is truly not a big deal), but other than that literally everything will be the same. Same name, same leadership, same teachers and staff, same classes, same extracurriculars, same policies, same everything.

Do you realize it makes you sound like a 5 year old when you pretend that a short move and a minor boundary change is anything like what school communities being wiped out of existence in a real school closure have to deal with?

The neighborhood is losing its high school - yes, they are going to another facility as a cohort, but there is something about the social compact of a neighborhood school that is important, and there is loss there. Just chill and let people be upset, if they need to eb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the BOE votes yes, it’s a vote to hurt Brown Stations ES https://moderatelymoco.com/brown-station-community-raises-segregation-concerns-over-mcps-boundary-proposal/

They really didn’t focus on how these last minute changes harmed Brown as well as Wheaton Woods. They weren’t giving us real proposals during the process just soliciting feedback, then showing their true hand at the end. I don’t think that is the way it should work.

This is a plan to close Ridgeview or Lakelands MS.

If you look at the Superintendent’s recommendation, it creates a situation in which all of the MSs are in the desired capacity range except Ridgeview and Lakelands which are both around 50% capacity. The projections for the 2029-30 school year of enrollment of Ridgeview + Lakelands = almost exactly 100% capacity at the Lakelands Park building.

This is Taylor’s plan for finding money for other initiatives, maintenance, etc. Close SSIMS and Ridgeview. Take the old Wootton building out of the running for construction and maintenance dollars.

I don’t know what ESs may be on the chopping block but it sure looks like Ridgeview is - with those kids getting moved to Lakelands Park.

At least SSIMS was honestly designated a closure. Closure is a process and MCPS is an LEA, local education authority, in a, SEA, state education authority. Maryland has regulations on public school closures. Part of that is where the LEA proposes to relocate students from the closed schools. This is the process on closure https://regulations.justia.com/states/maryland/title-13a/subtitle-02/chapter-13a-02-09/section-13a-02-09-01/

I posted about this issue previously. Relocation is just part of the closure. https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/garrett/Board.nsf/files/CPQLA554A890/$file/COMAR%2013A.02.09%20-%20Closing%20of%20Schools.pdf

Are you the weird person who thinks Wootton is being closed?

It's funny that you keep pointing to SSIMS, because that provides a perfect example of why the Wootton move is nothing like a closure.

If/when SSIMS closes, they'll close the school, let all the teachers and staff go and send them off to apply for jobs anywhere else in the county, all SSIMS-specific classes and extracurriculars and policies and practices will vanish, students will be split up and assigned who knows where and become part of brand new and often radically different schools, etc.

Does that sound anything like what is happening to Wootton? Not at all, right? Wootton is moving a couple miles and a small number of kids are changing (in exactly the same way as tons of other schools are having boundaries change right now, and not complaining that the boundaries shifts radically change their school and identity because it is truly not a big deal), but other than that literally everything will be the same. Same name, same leadership, same teachers and staff, same classes, same extracurriculars, same policies, same everything.

Do you realize it makes you sound like a 5 year old when you pretend that a short move and a minor boundary change is anything like what school communities being wiped out of existence in a real school closure have to deal with?

The neighborhood is losing its high school - yes, they are going to another facility as a cohort, but there is something about the social compact of a neighborhood school that is important, and there is loss there. Just chill and let people be upset, if they need to eb.

Being upset is 1 thing but embarrassing yourself to the entire county and digging in to fight the change at all costs is far from chill.