Initial boundary options for Woodward study area are up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and also, none of the options factor in behavioral change as people move based on the boundaries. so you are likely to end up with different outcomes than predicted when there are big changes to busing/boundaries.

I don't think this will be very impactful. Yes, some people will move, but you won't have low-income people moving into single family homes, and not many UMC will move into apartments. Some will choose private school for sure.

I would anticipate that many in CC would rent an apt in downtown Bethesda under option 3. This would have the secondary effect of tying up inventory

No

yes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and also, none of the options factor in behavioral change as people move based on the boundaries. so you are likely to end up with different outcomes than predicted when there are big changes to busing/boundaries.

I don't think this will be very impactful. Yes, some people will move, but you won't have low-income people moving into single family homes, and not many UMC will move into apartments. Some will choose private school for sure.

people definitely will move based on boundary changes. Every study on boundary changes shows this to be true.

But you're thinking about low-income people moving. That's not what causes the numbers to be wrong, because as you note they aren't likely to. What will happen is that the rich people that now have their kids zoned for some school with a 60 minute bus ride will either go private or move. Those kids will now not be lowering the FARMS rate at the school they would have been bused to. Ergo the proposed equalizing of FARMS rates (not that Option 3 even accomplishes that) won't actually happen.

I specifically said some people will move. But there is a shortage of SFHs. If a $1.2 million house lets say loses a lot of value and now sells for $800k, there absolutely will be UMC families that buy there. There are houses zoned for Kennedy right now that have sold for $1 million.

yeah the rich who have $1.2 million dollar homes can sell that and buy another one over in VA.

but you are arguing that some other less rich person will accept the bus ride and move into the area and keep the FARMs rate low?

Yes. I think some will. When we were buying we saw neighborhoods like this. UMC families with kids bought in neighborhoods zoned for high poverty schools. In some cases they didn't pay much attention to the schools or were just willing to try it out. Of course, some will just choose private. And maybe a shift towards families without school age children buying those houses, I guess, but I don't know how much demand there is in that demographic for a large SFH.

[Anonymous]

* but I also really doubt they will bus Farmland kids to Kennedy, it seems super pointless given it doesn't materially change the farms rate at Kennedy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:* but I also really doubt they will bus Farmland kids to Kennedy, it seems super pointless given it doesn't materially change the farms rate at Kennedy

or CC to Blair, since that doesn't change FARMS rate at Blair.

[Anonymous]

attempts to socially engineer FARMS rates based on involuntary busing are going to fail, for all of the segregation reasons already discussed in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:attempts to socially engineer FARMS rates based on involuntary busing are going to fail, for all of the segregation reasons already discussed in this thread.

heck, even voluntary busing would tend to be self-defeating.

[Anonymous]

MCPS is broke. We need to be focused on making schools better, and improving the deficit, rather than this self serving FARMS BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Economic outlook is 100% on topic.

Why, people overpaid for their homes and expect the market to continue to rise, which may or may not happen. The w community wanted the new school. What did they think would happen.

Most people thought they would have half of WJ go to Woodward, and then they would add an elementary school from the DCC to each of them. No one thought they would be bused across the county to the worst performing school in the county (speaking about Farmland under Option 3). Most also assumed WJ and Woodward would be similar demographically, FARMS rate, etc.

You're talking as though Option 3 is a done deal. I actually think it illustrates the limitations of this boundary study because the FARMS rates in the DCC barely change in this option. It seems obvious to me the costs, including the time spent by kids on the bus and the difficulties for families to participate in school communities, are not remotely worth it, and this option seems like it was designed to show that.

+1. Not to mention the extra staffing and maintenance costs, and the negative environmental impacts.

Yes to all this. I’m zoned for Einstein under all four options and even though Option 3 wouldn’t impact my kids’ bus ride and would likely raise my property value a bit, I think it’s a terrible option for the county overall. I like option 1 for continuity or option 4 with the modification suggest by RM parent above for geographic proximity, because I think both those factors help prioritize community building.

[Anonymous]

I live in Woodward or Wheaton depending on the option (formerly WJ). Can I be bussed to Whitman please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I live in Woodward or Wheaton depending on the option (formerly WJ). Can I be bussed to Whitman please?

Same boat. We'd be better off if they made Woodward a second WJ with the suggestion from RM parent above by modifying option 4 to send VM kids to WJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Economic outlook is 100% on topic.

Why, people overpaid for their homes and expect the market to continue to rise, which may or may not happen. The w community wanted the new school. What did they think would happen.

Most people thought they would have half of WJ go to Woodward, and then they would add an elementary school from the DCC to each of them. No one thought they would be bused across the county to the worst performing school in the county (speaking about Farmland under Option 3). Most also assumed WJ and Woodward would be similar demographically, FARMS rate, etc.

You're talking as though Option 3 is a done deal. I actually think it illustrates the limitations of this boundary study because the FARMS rates in the DCC barely change in this option. It seems obvious to me the costs, including the time spent by kids on the bus and the difficulties for families to participate in school communities, are not remotely worth it, and this option seems like it was designed to show that.

+1. Not to mention the extra staffing and maintenance costs, and the negative environmental impacts.

Yes to all this. I’m zoned for Einstein under all four options and even though Option 3 wouldn’t impact my kids’ bus ride and would likely raise my property value a bit, I think it’s a terrible option for the county overall. I like option 1 for continuity or option 4 with the modification suggest by RM parent above for geographic proximity, because I think both those factors help prioritize community building.

Einstein property values will continue to slowly increase for the lower cost housing regardless due to the location.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is broke. We need to be focused on making schools better, and improving the deficit, rather than this self serving FARMS BS.

They are not broke. They have a spending snd mismanagement issue. The BOE, central office and Taylor need to go but there is no one truely competent to replace them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Economic outlook is 100% on topic.

Why, people overpaid for their homes and expect the market to continue to rise, which may or may not happen. The w community wanted the new school. What did they think would happen.

Most people thought they would have half of WJ go to Woodward, and then they would add an elementary school from the DCC to each of them. No one thought they would be bused across the county to the worst performing school in the county (speaking about Farmland under Option 3). Most also assumed WJ and Woodward would be similar demographically, FARMS rate, etc.

Even outside of option 3, FARMS rate of Woodward is 30-45% range. Way higher than current WJ( 18%)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:attempts to socially engineer FARMS rates based on involuntary busing are going to fail, for all of the segregation reasons already discussed in this thread.

They should simply have voluntary magnet like limited bus service for 20% of FARMS kids in Whitman and Churchill. No one getting forced and much needed economic diversity in Whitman and Churchill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Economic outlook is 100% on topic.

Why, people overpaid for their homes and expect the market to continue to rise, which may or may not happen. The w community wanted the new school. What did they think would happen.

Most people thought they would have half of WJ go to Woodward, and then they would add an elementary school from the DCC to each of them. No one thought they would be bused across the county to the worst performing school in the county (speaking about Farmland under Option 3). Most also assumed WJ and Woodward would be similar demographically, FARMS rate, etc.

You're talking as though Option 3 is a done deal. I actually think it illustrates the limitations of this boundary study because the FARMS rates in the DCC barely change in this option. It seems obvious to me the costs, including the time spent by kids on the bus and the difficulties for families to participate in school communities, are not remotely worth it, and this option seems like it was designed to show that.

+1. Not to mention the extra staffing and maintenance costs, and the negative environmental impacts.

Yes to all this. I’m zoned for Einstein under all four options and even though Option 3 wouldn’t impact my kids’ bus ride and would likely raise my property value a bit, I think it’s a terrible option for the county overall. I like option 1 for continuity or option 4 with the modification suggest by RM parent above for geographic proximity, because I think both those factors help prioritize community building.

I also support option 4 with the modification suggest by RM parent above for geographic proximity and wells balanced Woodward and WJ.