Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a WJ parent and I have to tell you that my hope was that we could duplicate the special, diverse place that is WJ in Woodward, welcoming DCC families to BOTH schools arms wide open. Not to split up WJ and bus those families 45 minutes to another school.

+1
I remember sitting in very early meetings regarding the new high school and the emphasis being on Woodward and WJ being reasonably similar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's almost like there are no non-white people in any of the communities that will be bused far away.

That's a leap.

I am completely sympathetic to anyone concerned about long bus rides, and have said so, though you keep pretending not to notice.

I am not sympathetic to anyone who is demanding MCPS protect their property values. Property values that have benefited and continue to benefit from historical racial discrimination.

what about non-white people wanting to protect their property values?

They have also benefited financially from segregation. I have never said only White people shouldn't demand the government prop up their wealth that grew because of segregation.

Do I benefit from segregation if I started out poor and earned every cent, no inheritances, investing that money into my house in a diverse neighborhood (granted, it was segregated in the past).

Genuinely curious. Just doesn’t make much sense given the diversity here.

also "segregation" is being used very loosely. Are we talking about specific historical policies (redlining) or just generally what happened with housing and the correlation between race and income?

I don’t know what we are talking about here.

Historical policies that explicitly advantaged White people and disadvantaged Black people are directly linked with:
- The current racial wealth gap, which is enormous
- Where people live today and where multifamily housing is located
- Property values and their ongoing trajectory

Without these policies, while there certainly might still be "rich" and "poor" parts of town, you might have a school system where all the schools have at least 20% FARMS rates with maybe some with rates above 30%. Do you really think your home values would be as high as they are and continue to grow as much as they have? There would be less demand for homes in Bethesda because there wouldn't be schools with so much concentrated poverty.

Yes, everyone who has owned a house in a "W" school district (including WJ) for more than 5 years has directly benefited financially from the history of explicitly racist policies that have led to where we are now, which is that Black families have a quarter of the wealth that White families do (and this gap persists even when you look only at families with similar incomes, because of generational wealth).

And yes, some Black and Asian and Latino families have bought in some of these wealthy areas, and their properties have also benefited from segregation.

That is why I think it would be undeniably immoral for MCPS to include property values as a factor to consider in any of its boundary studies. Thankfully it is not a factor listed in Policy FAA. Proximity is and should be a factor, and FTR, I don't think the long bus rides proposed in option 3 are worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay parent disguised as being an “RM” parent .. you are clearly too invested to not have a dog in this fight.

Honestly, I live in Bayard Rustin zoned in RM cluster. I was involved with boundary study for new school in RM cluster and familiar with the process. Today I had free time so I looked at my Cluster and Woodward as well. I saw a way improve Woodward option 4 and shared. I had off day so commenting on both threads.

Anyway, why do you care about messenger. Just focus on message and debate, improve and so on...

RM parent improved WJ and Woodward community with this suggestion. Crowd sourcing on DCUM. Despite the mud slinging that occurs. Harder part is getting the stubborn policy makers to listen

What worked best during RM 5 ES:

1) Showing up and giving testimony and large number of families being present with banner during testimony. Sending electronic mail is way less effective than physically being present and supporting.

2 ) Getting community members educated by having meetings in various HOA. Once everyone agrees then have HOA president write and sign the letter. Then you can have all member signing the letter. Deliver the letter to BOE. Make copies and give it to all BOE member individually. Ther eis plenty of politics between members so don't assume that giving to one means you gave to everyone. But just be polite and ovey the message.

3) Arrange meetings with BOE members with core group of your community( likely to be your PTA board members who ) who can communicate well and know MCPS process somewhat. Try to do it with each BOE member and some time 2-3 may just attend one, that's fine. You have to probbaly do 2 rounds and then you will get clear idea which member will support you. Don't talk about property value. That's not the job of MCPS. Just stick to logical arguments and don't say negative about anyone.

4) Have various member of your community send emall in support of modified version of option 4 with justification.

Basically make your presence felt and it will help. It's a tiring process but if you don't advocate then who else will do it. Fortunately RM is not changing much so I plan to not get involved in anything.

I grew up in 99% FARMS equivalent in some other country and I can assure you that most parents want to support their kids. At least that's what I saw while growing up. I don't have the link handy but we came across a research during RM process that once you start crossing 20% FARMS it becomes harder and harder for school to support FAMRS and NON-FARMS both. So, I think it's advatageious to have as many HS as possible with 20% FARMS. I mean it can be 20-25%. Near zero FARMS is also not good. We also don't gain much by changing 70% FARMS to 55% and some time it makes the school worse due to losing the federal funds.

Good luck with boudaries. I am sure, it will work out fine.

It’s not realistic to have as many schools as possible at 20% FARMS when the system is over 40% FARMS. Unless you’re ok (as you seem to be) with warehousing black and brown kids in 70% FARMS schools to keep balanced demographics with a slight essence of poor kid for your white and Asian kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Correct, taxes are not user fees. The additional property taxes on higher valued homes mostly go to support schools in areas where there is a lower tax base to collect from. These high tax homes are disproportionately supporting the broader MCPS budget. Lots of those high tax homes aren't even "using" MCPS. However, when you start messing around with property values, you also decrease the taxable value of the home and erode the tax base. I'm not moving, my kids don't go to MCPS, I'll gladly take the tax break. Based on the maps I'm seeing, the new entrants to the W schools aren't going to see a huge increase in the value of their homes/property taxes. So the net seems like it will be a decrease in property taxes collected. Wonder how that hit to the MCPS budget will play out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Correct, taxes are not user fees. The additional property taxes on higher valued homes mostly go to support schools in areas where there is a lower tax base to collect from. These high tax homes are disproportionately supporting the broader MCPS budget. Lots of those high tax homes aren't even "using" MCPS. However, when you start messing around with property values, you also decrease the taxable value of the home and erode the tax base. I'm not moving, my kids don't go to MCPS, I'll gladly take the tax break. Based on the maps I'm seeing, the new entrants to the W schools aren't going to see a huge increase in the value of their homes/property taxes. So the net seems like it will be a decrease in property taxes collected. Wonder how that hit to the MCPS budget will play out?

They would be fine. Tax revenues are based on a ton of factors. Property values will continue to grow. The problem is that the MCPS budget will continue to grow faster than inflation because rising pension and healthcare costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it's almost like there are no non-white people in any of the communities that will be bused far away.

That's a leap.

I am completely sympathetic to anyone concerned about long bus rides, and have said so, though you keep pretending not to notice.

I am not sympathetic to anyone who is demanding MCPS protect their property values. Property values that have benefited and continue to benefit from historical racial discrimination.

what about non-white people wanting to protect their property values?

They have also benefited financially from segregation. I have never said only White people shouldn't demand the government prop up their wealth that grew because of segregation.

There are plenty of families of color on our neighborhood of $1M plus homes. Are they benefiting from segregation? I’m confused.

Yes. Being a family of color does not mean you cannot benefit from systemic racism, it just means the axes on which you benefit are probably more limited than a white family.

Isn’t this … integration? I think you’re picking on the wrong HS here. WJ has lots of Black and Brown families who are very wealthy. I think all this segregation talk assuming the wealthy at WH are white or Asian is super offensive.

+1

Take this non-sener talk elsewhere. We are a mixed race family living in Farmland. Plemnty of comfortably well off families of or racial mix are present in our street.

Don't try to paint a picture where all latinos or black are poor in WJ cluster. That language is very offensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:was Farmland specifically redlined, while other parts of Rockville were not?

I don’t think we have houses here that are that old. Plus lots of apartments.

regardless of whether the community was actually redlined to keep black people from owning homes there, the property values should go down because of historical racism everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Correct, taxes are not user fees. The additional property taxes on higher valued homes mostly go to support schools in areas where there is a lower tax base to collect from. These high tax homes are disproportionately supporting the broader MCPS budget. Lots of those high tax homes aren't even "using" MCPS. However, when you start messing around with property values, you also decrease the taxable value of the home and erode the tax base. I'm not moving, my kids don't go to MCPS, I'll gladly take the tax break. Based on the maps I'm seeing, the new entrants to the W schools aren't going to see a huge increase in the value of their homes/property taxes. So the net seems like it will be a decrease in property taxes collected. Wonder how that hit to the MCPS budget will play out?

They would be fine. Tax revenues are based on a ton of factors. Property values will continue to grow. The problem is that the MCPS budget will continue to grow faster than inflation because rising pension and healthcare costs.

definitely we should collect less in taxes to help schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Correct, taxes are not user fees. The additional property taxes on higher valued homes mostly go to support schools in areas where there is a lower tax base to collect from. These high tax homes are disproportionately supporting the broader MCPS budget. Lots of those high tax homes aren't even "using" MCPS. However, when you start messing around with property values, you also decrease the taxable value of the home and erode the tax base. I'm not moving, my kids don't go to MCPS, I'll gladly take the tax break. Based on the maps I'm seeing, the new entrants to the W schools aren't going to see a huge increase in the value of their homes/property taxes. So the net seems like it will be a decrease in property taxes collected. Wonder how that hit to the MCPS budget will play out?

They would be fine. Tax revenues are based on a ton of factors. Property values will continue to grow. The problem is that the MCPS budget will continue to grow faster than inflation because rising pension and healthcare costs.

definitely we should collect less in taxes to help schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Correct, taxes are not user fees. The additional property taxes on higher valued homes mostly go to support schools in areas where there is a lower tax base to collect from. These high tax homes are disproportionately supporting the broader MCPS budget. Lots of those high tax homes aren't even "using" MCPS. However, when you start messing around with property values, you also decrease the taxable value of the home and erode the tax base. I'm not moving, my kids don't go to MCPS, I'll gladly take the tax break. Based on the maps I'm seeing, the new entrants to the W schools aren't going to see a huge increase in the value of their homes/property taxes. So the net seems like it will be a decrease in property taxes collected. Wonder how that hit to the MCPS budget will play out?

They would be fine. Tax revenues are based on a ton of factors. Property values will continue to grow. The problem is that the MCPS budget will continue to grow faster than inflation because rising pension and healthcare costs.

definitely we should collect less in taxes to help schools.

That's some pretty blatantly self-serving speculation.

Looking at some of these proposed changes I can see several areas where property values will skyrocket.

[Anonymous]

Especially because Option 3 moves more kids east than west

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Okay parent disguised as being an “RM” parent .. you are clearly too invested to not have a dog in this fight.

Honestly, I live in Bayard Rustin zoned in RM cluster. I was involved with boundary study for new school in RM cluster and familiar with the process. Today I had free time so I looked at my Cluster and Woodward as well. I saw a way improve Woodward option 4 and shared. I had off day so commenting on both threads.

Anyway, why do you care about messenger. Just focus on message and debate, improve and so on...

RM parent improved WJ and Woodward community with this suggestion. Crowd sourcing on DCUM. Despite the mud slinging that occurs. Harder part is getting the stubborn policy makers to listen

What worked best during RM 5 ES:

1) Showing up and giving testimony and large number of families being present with banner during testimony. Sending electronic mail is way less effective than physically being present and supporting.

2 ) Getting community members educated by having meetings in various HOA. Once everyone agrees then have HOA president write and sign the letter. Then you can have all member signing the letter. Deliver the letter to BOE. Make copies and give it to all BOE member individually. Ther eis plenty of politics between members so don't assume that giving to one means you gave to everyone. But just be polite and ovey the message.

3) Arrange meetings with BOE members with core group of your community( likely to be your PTA board members who ) who can communicate well and know MCPS process somewhat. Try to do it with each BOE member and some time 2-3 may just attend one, that's fine. You have to probbaly do 2 rounds and then you will get clear idea which member will support you. Don't talk about property value. That's not the job of MCPS. Just stick to logical arguments and don't say negative about anyone.

4) Have various member of your community send emall in support of modified version of option 4 with justification.

Basically make your presence felt and it will help. It's a tiring process but if you don't advocate then who else will do it. Fortunately RM is not changing much so I plan to not get involved in anything.

I grew up in 99% FARMS equivalent in some other country and I can assure you that most parents want to support their kids. At least that's what I saw while growing up. I don't have the link handy but we came across a research during RM process that once you start crossing 20% FARMS it becomes harder and harder for school to support FAMRS and NON-FARMS both. So, I think it's advatageious to have as many HS as possible with 20% FARMS. I mean it can be 20-25%. Near zero FARMS is also not good. We also don't gain much by changing 70% FARMS to 55% and some time it makes the school worse due to losing the federal funds.

Good luck with boudaries. I am sure, it will work out fine.

It’s not realistic to have as many schools as possible at 20% FARMS when the system is over 40% FARMS. Unless you’re ok (as you seem to be) with warehousing black and brown kids in 70% FARMS schools to keep balanced demographics with a slight essence of poor kid for your white and Asian kids.

It's possible to create 20-25% FAMRS in WJ and Woodward. It's far better than creating WJ with 10-12% and creating Woodward with 40% when they are less 0.6 miles away from each other. Any area in middle like RM, BCC, Woodward, WJ etc , it's always possibel to pick boundaries which results in 20-25% FAMRS in these areas without adding to travel time by much. Any other areas it's not practical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Correct, taxes are not user fees. The additional property taxes on higher valued homes mostly go to support schools in areas where there is a lower tax base to collect from. These high tax homes are disproportionately supporting the broader MCPS budget. Lots of those high tax homes aren't even "using" MCPS. However, when you start messing around with property values, you also decrease the taxable value of the home and erode the tax base. I'm not moving, my kids don't go to MCPS, I'll gladly take the tax break. Based on the maps I'm seeing, the new entrants to the W schools aren't going to see a huge increase in the value of their homes/property taxes. So the net seems like it will be a decrease in property taxes collected. Wonder how that hit to the MCPS budget will play out?

They would be fine. Tax revenues are based on a ton of factors. Property values will continue to grow. The problem is that the MCPS budget will continue to grow faster than inflation because rising pension and healthcare costs.

definitely we should collect less in taxes to help schools.

That's some pretty blatantly self-serving speculation.

Looking at some of these proposed changes I can see several areas where property values will skyrocket.

just agreeing with the PP who said it was fine if property values overall decline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Especially because Option 3 moves more kids east than west

Sorry, more kids west than east

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Correct, taxes are not user fees. The additional property taxes on higher valued homes mostly go to support schools in areas where there is a lower tax base to collect from. These high tax homes are disproportionately supporting the broader MCPS budget. Lots of those high tax homes aren't even "using" MCPS. However, when you start messing around with property values, you also decrease the taxable value of the home and erode the tax base. I'm not moving, my kids don't go to MCPS, I'll gladly take the tax break. Based on the maps I'm seeing, the new entrants to the W schools aren't going to see a huge increase in the value of their homes/property taxes. So the net seems like it will be a decrease in property taxes collected. Wonder how that hit to the MCPS budget will play out?

They would be fine. Tax revenues are based on a ton of factors. Property values will continue to grow. The problem is that the MCPS budget will continue to grow faster than inflation because rising pension and healthcare costs.

definitely we should collect less in taxes to help schools.

That's some pretty blatantly self-serving speculation.

Looking at some of these proposed changes I can see several areas where property values will skyrocket.

just agreeing with the PP who said it was fine if property values overall decline.

The post you were responding to said property values will continue to grow