| It sounds like option H and/or EFG don't help with the overcrowding at QO and Gaithersburg. Wasn't that the whole point of the initial study? |
Wait I thought it we had a money problem? Doing it onsight means more money. Again these are Mcps words not mine: “Across all options, the least expensive capital investment is renewal with off-site swing, followed by on-site new build, and the costliest being phased-occupation renewal.” Your phased renovation is the most expensive according—again—to Mcps. Using crown as a swing school according—again—to Mcps is the cheapest. |
I'm curious what this is referring to. I don't see why the state would weigh in on UPP taxes. Those are governed primarily by county law, not state law. |
Once again, MCPS own words. Not mine. Their analysis shows they don’t expect enrollment to go up until 2035 at the earliest. Ask them why and how accurate this is. |
LOL phased in renovation? Are you lol living in lala land? We’re in this position because Mcps has no money (remember they lost $40 million in state money because they couldn’t submit a few forms properly). If you think we have money for the most expensive option of phased in renovation, I’m sure that person who keeps trying to sell bridges can sell a bridge to you. |
Ok, so why are you saying Crown would be needed then? |
|
Once again, here’s MCPS own words:
“If MCPS is able to utilize Crown HS as a secondary swing space, it has the potential to save hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of its use. Our analysis shows that of the 11 secondary schools originally looked at for capital needs, six are within a 20-minute drive time, with the additional five laying just outside that drive-time radius. The savings are the most noticeable for schools needing renewals, and the logistics will be easiest for closer schools, but not insurmountable for those a little further. Crown HS's centralized location makes it an ideal opportunity for MCPS to utilize off-site swing for secondary school needs within its portfolio.” |
I’m saying it is not needed now, maybe later starting in 2035 or later |
A large one-time cost is financially implausible, but long-term operation of a school that isn't needed to address capacity isn't? How does that make sense? We'd quickly make up for the added renovation cost. |
No money for you. Plenty for Taylor’s pet projects. |
OK, but that's pretty different than what you initially said, or at least implied. There aren't projections indicating a need for increased capacity. Not now, not in the future. |
Mcps is predicting 2035 not me |
Damascus isn’t the only school that needs renovations. It’s not a one time cost. And if we use crown as a holding school, its operation and cost is justified. Renovations on site cost more money and is dangerous for kid. Phased renovation cause more money because it takes more time. If you disagree with the below, go yell at Mcps. Im just the messenger: “If MCPS is able to utilize Crown HS as a secondary swing space, it has the potential to save hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of its use. Our analysis shows that of the 11 secondary schools originally looked at for capital needs, six are within a 20-minute drive time, with the additional five laying just outside that drive-time radius. The savings are the most noticeable for schools needing renewals, and the logistics will be easiest for closer schools, but not insurmountable for those a little further. Crown HS's centralized location makes it an ideal opportunity for MCPS to utilize off-site swing for secondary school needs within its portfolio.” |
If crown is not the logical choice for Damascus, then how can Wootton be a logical choice? Where is your logic? |
lol i know right? Surely crown is too far. The more logical option is to pick an option that’s even further! |