Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you not see new plan? Demographics is def. number one priority going forward.

Yah, goal is to have all schools perfrom similar. I susopect bussing will be huge part of this plan by distributing all kids in different schools. It won't help any kid but it will look good on paper when reviewing school's disparity.

I am convinced that BOE will do all they can to distribute FARMS. Some variation of option 3 is going to be boundary. No other option will match with that they sare saying in their strategic plan for 2026-2030.

Redistributing farms is not a good idea as they lose funding and kids will still self segregate.

Which schools specifically receive extra funding because of their FARMS rates?

I know that title 1 schools do get extra finding. I don't know about other situations.

Any Title I school is one that receives funding from the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) to support students in high poverty areas. Title. Cutt off is 75% so it will be poor decision to try to make any school go from 80% to 70%. Twinbrook ES faced situations like that in past,

[Anonymous]

Rich or poor, everyone has the same right to get education provided by MCPS. That's about it. No one has any right to live in certain area. You buy and live in area where you can afford it.

MCPS should simply make a cut off for lets say 20 minutes bus rides and draw most sensible boundary. Rich or poor, all can afford to take 20 minutres ride.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If our goals are different then the solutions we want will be different and that's okay. Talking about what people want is helpful. Of course everyone wants short distances to school. Everyone wants their kid to stay with their friends from elementary to high school. But some people also are scared their property values will go down and that their child will have to attend a school with a different "character" than the current school. Also, most people don't want overcrowding, but also don't want to be have a longer bus ride to alleviate overcrowding.

They put out a whole survey about what people want, and I haven't seen the results come out anywhere. Have these been released?

These are just my observations from previous analyses and this thread

Yes, but there's no need for any of us to speculate. This data has been collected. Does anyone know whether/where it's going to be released?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you not see new plan? Demographics is def. number one priority going forward.

Yah, goal is to have all schools perfrom similar. I susopect bussing will be huge part of this plan by distributing all kids in different schools. It won't help any kid but it will look good on paper when reviewing school's disparity.

I am convinced that BOE will do all they can to distribute FARMS. Some variation of option 3 is going to be boundary. No other option will match with that they sare saying in their strategic plan for 2026-2030.

Redistributing farms is not a good idea as they lose funding and kids will still self segregate.

Which schools specifically receive extra funding because of their FARMS rates?

I know that title 1 schools do get extra finding. I don't know about other situations.

Any Title I school is one that receives funding from the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) to support students in high poverty areas. Title. Cutt off is 75% so it will be poor decision to try to make any school go from 80% to 70%. Twinbrook ES faced situations like that in past,

This is a boundary study involving middle and high schools so no ES is going to lose its Title 1 funding because of this. As others have mentioned, no MCPS high schools receive Title 1 funding (or are focus schools). I think there is 1 middle school (Shannon) in the Woodward study that is Title 1? So we are talking about 1 out of 22 schools that even has Title 1 to lose.

Promoting segregation based on false information is not a good look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did you not see new plan? Demographics is def. number one priority going forward.

Yah, goal is to have all schools perfrom similar. I susopect bussing will be huge part of this plan by distributing all kids in different schools. It won't help any kid but it will look good on paper when reviewing school's disparity.

I am convinced that BOE will do all they can to distribute FARMS. Some variation of option 3 is going to be boundary. No other option will match with that they sare saying in their strategic plan for 2026-2030.

Redistributing farms is not a good idea as they lose funding and kids will still self segregate.

Which schools specifically receive extra funding because of their FARMS rates?

If it is over 50% FARMS that makes it a Title I school leading to greater funding. I think Wheaton was like 57% FARMS….but that was a while ago.

There are no Title I high schools in MCPS.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/dtecps/title1/schools/

Thank you. I wonder why the percentages don’t apply to the high schools.

So some folks are falsely stating that segregation is in low income kids' best interest because they get more funding that way, except they don't. DCUM, never change.

Well this is overall false. Schools losing title 1 status do lose funding and title I status is based on high farms rates. Why McPS doesn’t allocate any farms money to high schools despite high farms rates is…well no one seems to know.

If you are making claims about what is best for low income kids in other communities, you should make sure your claims are correct or you look like a complete see you next tuesday. You are pretending to care about these communities but are just pursuing your own self interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you talking about property values again??! Please just STOP! This is about children and schools..

I don't have kids in school and planning to downsize. Losing 100-200K is huge for me. I suspect that will happen with 30% FARMS.
40-50% FARMS will actually result in a bigger drop and I won't have any equity left for retirement.

Your house is not a good retirement plan. It’s not going to impact things.

Its a big chunk of my net worth and I was going to downsize soon. It was surely a big part of my retiurement plan.

I don’t get people like you.

I am not the PP but poeple have right to feel bad about a big chunk of retirement money dissapearing. Seniors may not have kids in school but they pay taxes whoch support schools. BOE has every right to take whatver decision they want but citizens have evry right to express themselves. I don't see a problem with that and not sure why you don't get it.

I agree. I am very solidly on the side that property values don’t matter to this equation, but of course I realize that home equity is a huge part of a financial portfolio especially for the middle class. It’s kind of silly to argue that it shouldn’t be. That doesn’t make it relevant to this conversation, but there’s no reason to be mean. We are all subject to the ups and downs of various investments and I think we can agree that it sucks when investments go down. Whether they will in fact go down is of course a separate question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you talking about property values again??! Please just STOP! This is about children and schools..

I don't have kids in school and planning to downsize. Losing 100-200K is huge for me. I suspect that will happen with 30% FARMS.
40-50% FARMS will actually result in a bigger drop and I won't have any equity left for retirement.

Your house is not a good retirement plan. It’s not going to impact things.

Its a big chunk of my net worth and I was going to downsize soon. It was surely a big part of my retiurement plan.

I don’t get people like you.

I am not the PP but poeple have right to feel bad about a big chunk of retirement money dissapearing. Seniors may not have kids in school but they pay taxes whoch support schools. BOE has every right to take whatver decision they want but citizens have evry right to express themselves. I don't see a problem with that and not sure why you don't get it.

I agree. I am very solidly on the side that property values don’t matter to this equation, but of course I realize that home equity is a huge part of a financial portfolio especially for the middle class. It’s kind of silly to argue that it shouldn’t be. That doesn’t make it relevant to this conversation, but there’s no reason to be mean. We are all subject to the ups and downs of various investments and I think we can agree that it sucks when investments go down. Whether they will in fact go down is of course a separate question.

These concerns should be posted in the money forum. Nobody is going to feel sorry for you because the house you bought for $100k might possibly only sell for $1 million instead of $1.2 million.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we all need to focus on the issues at hand. There are smart successful kids on both sides. There are great meighborhoods in both parts of the county.

+1. We need a unified strategy against unreasonably long bus rides, in any direction.

And that means opposing option 3, which would increase busing on average. It also introduces some very long (>6.5 miles) bus rides for several neighborhoods.

It looks like some arguments against this bus-centric option can come from strategic plan goal 3 objective 10 to reduce carbon emissions, and objective 12, to operate with efficiency /responsibly use public resources

[Anonymous]

I pay 18k in property taxes. A larger house, blocks from me but zoned for another school district, pays 10k. Explain to me why I am not paying more to live in a specific school district.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I pay 18k in property taxes. A larger house, blocks from me but zoned for another school district, pays 10k. Explain to me why I am not paying more to live in a specific school district.

Wow, you sound rich if you can afford a house with that much property taxes. Most of us could never afford to own that.
Btw did you know taxes are not user fees? Sorry life isn't always fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you talking about property values again??! Please just STOP! This is about children and schools..

I don't have kids in school and planning to downsize. Losing 100-200K is huge for me. I suspect that will happen with 30% FARMS.
40-50% FARMS will actually result in a bigger drop and I won't have any equity left for retirement.

Your house is not a good retirement plan. It’s not going to impact things.

Its a big chunk of my net worth and I was going to downsize soon. It was surely a big part of my retiurement plan.

I don’t get people like you.

I am not the PP but poeple have right to feel bad about a big chunk of retirement money dissapearing. Seniors may not have kids in school but they pay taxes whoch support schools. BOE has every right to take whatver decision they want but citizens have evry right to express themselves. I don't see a problem with that and not sure why you don't get it.

I agree. I am very solidly on the side that property values don’t matter to this equation, but of course I realize that home equity is a huge part of a financial portfolio especially for the middle class. It’s kind of silly to argue that it shouldn’t be. That doesn’t make it relevant to this conversation, but there’s no reason to be mean. We are all subject to the ups and downs of various investments and I think we can agree that it sucks when investments go down. Whether they will in fact go down is of course a separate question.

These concerns should be posted in the money forum. Nobody is going to feel sorry for you because the house you bought for $100k might possibly only sell for $1 million instead of $1.2 million.

+1. Really hard to feel sorry for seniors who have been clinging to their houses instead of downsizing already because they were hoping their propoerty value would go up even more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you talking about property values again??! Please just STOP! This is about children and schools..

I don't have kids in school and planning to downsize. Losing 100-200K is huge for me. I suspect that will happen with 30% FARMS.
40-50% FARMS will actually result in a bigger drop and I won't have any equity left for retirement.

Your house is not a good retirement plan. It’s not going to impact things.

Its a big chunk of my net worth and I was going to downsize soon. It was surely a big part of my retiurement plan.

I don’t get people like you.

I am not the PP but poeple have right to feel bad about a big chunk of retirement money dissapearing. Seniors may not have kids in school but they pay taxes whoch support schools. BOE has every right to take whatver decision they want but citizens have evry right to express themselves. I don't see a problem with that and not sure why you don't get it.

I agree. I am very solidly on the side that property values don’t matter to this equation, but of course I realize that home equity is a huge part of a financial portfolio especially for the middle class. It’s kind of silly to argue that it shouldn’t be. That doesn’t make it relevant to this conversation, but there’s no reason to be mean. We are all subject to the ups and downs of various investments and I think we can agree that it sucks when investments go down. Whether they will in fact go down is of course a separate question.

These concerns should be posted in the money forum. Nobody is going to feel sorry for you because the house you bought for $100k might possibly only sell for $1 million instead of $1.2 million.

+1. Really hard to feel sorry for seniors who have been clinging to their houses instead of downsizing already because they were hoping their propoerty value would go up even more.

Downsize to what. My parents kept their house that I lived in all my childhood. It’s not a big house and where would they go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are you talking about property values again??! Please just STOP! This is about children and schools..

I don't have kids in school and planning to downsize. Losing 100-200K is huge for me. I suspect that will happen with 30% FARMS.
40-50% FARMS will actually result in a bigger drop and I won't have any equity left for retirement.

Your house is not a good retirement plan. It’s not going to impact things.

Its a big chunk of my net worth and I was going to downsize soon. It was surely a big part of my retiurement plan.

I don’t get people like you.

I am not the PP but poeple have right to feel bad about a big chunk of retirement money dissapearing. Seniors may not have kids in school but they pay taxes whoch support schools. BOE has every right to take whatver decision they want but citizens have evry right to express themselves. I don't see a problem with that and not sure why you don't get it.

I agree. I am very solidly on the side that property values don’t matter to this equation, but of course I realize that home equity is a huge part of a financial portfolio especially for the middle class. It’s kind of silly to argue that it shouldn’t be. That doesn’t make it relevant to this conversation, but there’s no reason to be mean. We are all subject to the ups and downs of various investments and I think we can agree that it sucks when investments go down. Whether they will in fact go down is of course a separate question.

These concerns should be posted in the money forum. Nobody is going to feel sorry for you because the house you bought for $100k might possibly only sell for $1 million instead of $1.2 million.

+1. Really hard to feel sorry for seniors who have been clinging to their houses instead of downsizing already because they were hoping their propoerty value would go up even more.

Downsize to what. My parents kept their house that I lived in all my childhood. It’s not a big house and where would they go?

Well if they're not planning to sell than why does it matter if their property values change marginally if their neighborhood is rezoned to a different HS?

[Anonymous]

writing off the material conditions of people's lives as unimportant is why Democrats lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we all need to focus on the issues at hand. There are smart successful kids on both sides. There are great meighborhoods in both parts of the county.

+1. We need a unified strategy against unreasonably long bus rides, in any direction.

And that means opposing option 3, which would increase busing on average. It also introduces some very long (>6.5 miles) bus rides for several neighborhoods.

It looks like some arguments against this bus-centric option can come from strategic plan goal 3 objective 10 to reduce carbon emissions, and objective 12, to operate with efficiency /responsibly use public resources

Does Moco have other environmental regulations that could be employed here?