Kate Stewart asks BOE to reject SSIMS closure resolution

[Anonymous]

SSIMS staff is going to want to know what’s up before voluntary transfer season

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wolff put up a new resolution asking the the SSIMS/SCES decision be delayed and considered during the upcoming elementary school boundary study.

Wolff's resolution was approved.

Wait, really? Did MCPS staff argue against it? Was there any discussion about what this means for the MS/HS boundary options? Do you know what time stamp on the board meeting video to look for to watch this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wolff put up a new resolution asking the the SSIMS/SCES decision be delayed and considered during the upcoming elementary school boundary study.

Wolff's resolution was approved.

Wait, really? Did MCPS staff argue against it? Was there any discussion about what this means for the MS/HS boundary options? Do you know what time stamp on the board meeting video to look for to watch this?

It's at 1:51. Clearly all the Board members had prepped and agreed on it beforehand. I suspect Taylor was only pretending to argue for the faster timeline at the beginning, or he would have argued harder (and twisted arms behind the scenes.)

https://www.youtube.com/live/1bWb9wK1gH0?si=7kztMzaas45u3eHs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wolff put up a new resolution asking the the SSIMS/SCES decision be delayed and considered during the upcoming elementary school boundary study.

Wolff's resolution was approved.

Wait, really? Did MCPS staff argue against it? Was there any discussion about what this means for the MS/HS boundary options? Do you know what time stamp on the board meeting video to look for to watch this?

It's at 1:51. Clearly all the Board members had prepped and agreed on it beforehand. I suspect Taylor was only pretending to argue for the faster timeline at the beginning, or he would have argued harder (and twisted arms behind the scenes.)

https://www.youtube.com/live/1bWb9wK1gH0?si=7kztMzaas45u3eHs

You're probably right, but it was beautiful to watch when he read his resolution for an accelerated closure process and no one seconded him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wolff put up a new resolution asking the the SSIMS/SCES decision be delayed and considered during the upcoming elementary school boundary study.

Wolff's resolution was approved.

Wait, really? Did MCPS staff argue against it? Was there any discussion about what this means for the MS/HS boundary options? Do you know what time stamp on the board meeting video to look for to watch this?

It's at 1:51. Clearly all the Board members had prepped and agreed on it beforehand. I suspect Taylor was only pretending to argue for the faster timeline at the beginning, or he would have argued harder (and twisted arms behind the scenes.)

https://www.youtube.com/live/1bWb9wK1gH0?si=7kztMzaas45u3eHs

You're probably right, but it was beautiful to watch when he read his resolution for an accelerated closure process and no one seconded him.

Nah, he actually had a really good argument for why it had to happen on this schedule (that it affects the boundary decisions in March) and would absolutely have pulled it out if he really wanted it to die. I suppose he could have realized he lost after arguing against this behind the scenes and wanted to save face at the board meeting by not making it a big fight he wouldn't win, but I highly doubt he would have gotten unanimous disagreement from the board members if he was fighting this hard behind the scenes. I wonder what changed in his calculations?

[Anonymous]

He just lost plain and simple. His process and research wasn’t there and I suspect the council was involved. The fact that Taylor didn’t fight at tonight’s meeting doesn’t mean that he didn’t want it to pass. It just means he lost before tonight’s meeting even started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, in effect, this newly passed resolution means that the three new options E, F, and G are eliminated as possibilities?

Anything is *possible* but essentially yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in effect, this newly passed resolution means that the three new options E, F, and G are eliminated as possibilities?

Not really, the superintendent can propose whatever he wants

Well sure, he technically could. But the board just unanimously voted that they won't be deciding whether to close SSIMS before March, which is when they'll be voting on the new boundaries for HS/MS.

Well yes but they can still, for example, switch Wood Acres and BES. Not closing SSIMS doesn't prevent him from doing it even though the only option that proposes this also proposes closing SSIMS

That would be ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I don’t want to look at Jawando’s IG account- what does he say? Anyone paraphrase for me?

https://mocoshow.com/2025/12/11/councilmember-jawando-raises-concerns-over-timeline-for-silver-spring-school-closure-proposal-pgsql-copy-code/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wolff put up a new resolution asking the the SSIMS/SCES decision be delayed and considered during the upcoming elementary school boundary study.

Wolff's resolution was approved.

Wait, really? Did MCPS staff argue against it? Was there any discussion about what this means for the MS/HS boundary options? Do you know what time stamp on the board meeting video to look for to watch this?

It's at 1:51. Clearly all the Board members had prepped and agreed on it beforehand. I suspect Taylor was only pretending to argue for the faster timeline at the beginning, or he would have argued harder (and twisted arms behind the scenes.)

https://www.youtube.com/live/1bWb9wK1gH0?si=7kztMzaas45u3eHs

You're probably right, but it was beautiful to watch when he read his resolution for an accelerated closure process and no one seconded him.


Yes, that was a very satisfying moment. I hope the community gets some meaningful concessions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SSIMS staff is going to want to know what’s up before voluntary transfer season

Yet another serious issue and your post is a reminder of the stakes in this for people's lives.

[Anonymous]

There wasn’t any SCEs discussion right? The resolution was only about closing SSIMS

[Anonymous]

What does this mean for the Eastern replacement project? How big are they going to make it? Or does it get delayed until they have this figured out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There wasn’t any SCEs discussion right? The resolution was only about closing SSIMS

Nope, although I feel like it was maybe implied by the references to linking the SSIMS decision to the ES boundary study (i.e. whether a new SCES needs to be constructed at all if it closes, versus just reassigning those kids to other schools), because otherwise I don't see the SSIMS connection to the ES boundary study..

But there was no actual discussion of anything, just Board members reading little prepared speeches from their notes and then a unanimous vote. And I'm pretty sure none of them mentioned SCES although I wouldn't swear to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What does this mean for the Eastern replacement project? How big are they going to make it? Or does it get delayed until they have this figured out?

I had thought Taylor made it clear that the entire CIP depended on moving forward with SSIMS/SCES plans. Does this send them back to the drawing board for the whole budget plan?