Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:At a minimum, Crown should be used as a holding school for Magruder. It would allow the Magruder repairs to be completed much quicker than if they have to wait to fix Wootton before they can use that as their holding school.


And if Taylor wants to use Wootton as a holding school, then there is no reason to move Wootton to Crown unless it is declared unfit for human habitation - which means that MCPS is officially closing Wootton. In that case, MCPS must comply with COMAR regulations, which it hasn’t. Taylor is trying to get around this failure by moving the boundary at the same time he moves Wootton’s kids over to Crown (but not all Wootton kids).


This isn't true. No evidence that a rebuild is a closure. And in fact buildings have been rebuilt on several occasions without it triggering closure requirements.


If Wootton is going to be used as a holding school, there is no reason to close it, move the Wootton boundary to encompass Crown, and transplant the Wootton kids into Crown.

If Taylor officially condemns Wootton’s building, slates it for demolition, and agrees NEVER to use the current building as a holding school, then Option H would make a bit more sense. If he won’t, then this is all a charade to cover up his incompetence or intentional plan to avoid using Crown as a holding school.


Option H does make sense given timing. The Crown building is slated to open in 2027, the need for a holding school will be sometime in the future after 2027, and current enrollment doesn't require a 27th high school.

The current Wootton site is probably going to sit empty for a couple years after Wootton moves to Crown until the holding school is needed.


The point is that if Wootton will be used as the holding school, then it can be operated where it is right now. Crown can be used as a holding school because that gives MCPS the flexibility it needs - just like Woodward is today. Instead, Option H closes a high performing school.


Option H moves Wootton; 5 out of 6 of the elementary schools are staying in the boundary, all the administrators and teachers are moving to the new location. If it was a closure, the admins and teachers would be dispersed among other schools in MCPS.

The current Wootton site as a holding school is the most flexible, since MCPS doesn't have plans to use a holding school by 2027. The needed renovations for Wootton can be delayed until money is budgeted and a holding school is actually needed.

The Crown site will be ready for students by 2027, so either it sits empty waiting for MCPS to need a holding school or it's used for its intended purpose as a high school. Moving Wootton to Crown just makes the most sense given the situation.


FACTS. But Wootton families don't deal in those.


Nope. It closes it. If it were a move, the. Taylor wouldn’t have to move the boundaries to make it happen. He also wouldn’t need to carve up Wootton’s student body. But he’s doing both.

Just admit it. Taylor is trying to fille a school that shouldn’t have been built, but he wants to use Wootton as a holding school - both of which help MCPS cover up its poor planning, with Wootton kids treated as playing cards.


He *doesn't* need to move the boundaries to make it happen. But using the proposed boundaries makes much more sense and is much fairer than simply moving Wootton over as-is. And we are in the midst of a boundary study so it's the appropriate time to make sensible boundary changes to Wootton, and there's no good reason not to (except that some Wootton parents will gripe about it.)


Is the Crown building under construction within Wootton’s boundaries? I thought it was outside Wootton’s boundaries, which is why Taylor had to propose boundary changes in order to avoid Wootton being deemed a closure under Maryland law? If it’s within Wootton’s boundaries, what right to Gaithersburg families have to claim it was built solely for them?


The apartments across the street from Crown at Rio are districted to Wootton, the Crown neighborhood is districted to Gaithersburg.

The DuFief, Stone Mill, and Travilah ES are currently districted to Wootton and they're closer to Crown than the current Wootton building.

A boundary study was always going to need to be done when Crown opens because its surrounding area is currently districted to other schools.

The City of Gaithersburg's concerns were addressed when the Fields Road community got moved in along with the Crown neighborhood to Wootton @ Crown in the modified H recommendation.


+1 this. My neighorhood goes to RM but our neighborhood is closer to current Wootton than most of the kids currently in boundsry for Wootton. The majority of Wootton kids live in North Potomac which is closer to Crown and some kids currently at Fallsmead in Wootton cluster can walk to Crown. Its no different than now - some Fallsmead kids can walk to current Wootton, so with the location change other current Fallsmead atudents can walk. Wootton is getting very upset about change for *them* but in a boundary study many students shift schools and boundaries. That is literally the purpose of the study ...


North Potomac is a fancy word for Gaithersburg.


As a resident of actual Gaithersburg city proper, yes and no.

The sections that call themselves North Potomac aren't actually in the city limits of Gaithersburg; they're sandwiched between the boundaries of Gaithersburg and Rockville. For awhile, the zip code read as "Gaithersburg", but they got their own name now.

But, I've been around long enough that I still roll my eyes at "North Potomac" and "North Bethesda".


We call some areas on the west side of 270 Gaithersville because it’s hard to tell which city you’re in. If Rockville or Gaithersburg proper people are unhappy, they should just fundraise and start their own school system. You already deal with your own trash so this won’t be much different.
Anonymous
Wow:

Taylor: “What’s the Worst That Could Happen? They Fire Me?”

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2026/02/23/taylor-whats-the-worst-that-could-happen-they-fire-me/
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Wow:

Taylor: “What’s the Worst That Could Happen? They Fire Me?”

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2026/02/23/taylor-whats-the-worst-that-could-happen-they-fire-me/


Certainly supports the hypothesis that Taylor will be long gone by the time the many changes he is pushing through are implemented and, likely, a complete disaster
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Wow:

Taylor: “What’s the Worst That Could Happen? They Fire Me?”

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2026/02/23/taylor-whats-the-worst-that-could-happen-they-fire-me/


Unfortunately this is probably the mindset of a lot of people in mcps leadership.
Sad state.
Anonymous
Building Crown maybe a "mistake" now but it won't be in the near future after they have completed the new residential projects at Rio lakefront, Kentlands where the Famous Daves is, Lakeforest Town Center, the 150 new townhomes slated to be on 355 at Deer Park and at Game Preserve, as well as the completion of Bloom Village. Gaithersburg/Montgomery Village is going to see a potential population spike and it's best to have space now in advance.

That isn't even factoring in the inevitable rolling over of like 60% of the single family homes in that area as the families who all bought in the 90s are still there with no kids will be aging out and leaving the area in the next decade or less.

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
That isn't even factoring in the inevitable rolling over of like 60% of the single family homes in that area as the families who all bought in the 90s are still there with no kids will be aging out and leaving the area in the next decade or less.



This isn't talked about nearly enough. I agree that enrollment should increase when the older generations leave the single family homes they currently occupy.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
That isn't even factoring in the inevitable rolling over of like 60% of the single family homes in that area as the families who all bought in the 90s are still there with no kids will be aging out and leaving the area in the next decade or less.



This isn't talked about nearly enough. I agree that enrollment should increase when the older generations leave the single family homes they currently occupy.


The neighborhood I grew up in the East Village used to have like 30 kids on it in the 90s. My parents still live there and now they will get like 1 trick or treater for Halloween as the average homeowner on the street is like 60. It's like that for almost all of the East Village. Goshen ES is going to see a massive enrollment spike if the housing market ever becomes more affordable
Anonymous
Did the public hearing on this happen tonight?
Anonymous
Question for those at the public meeting tonight arguing that if Modified Option H is implemented that Stone Mill and Travilah both be placed in Cabin John: why not also consider asking for both to be at Hoover? The schools are relatively comparable and Hoover is actually a bit closer to both Stone Mill and Travilah than Cabin John. If they did that they could then just keep Cold Spring at Cabin John, which isn’t too far from it.

Distance to CJMS for each school:

Cold Spring (2.7 mi)
Stone Mill (7.6 mi)
Travilah (8.3 mi)

Distance to Hoover for each:

Cold Spring (1.5 mi)
Stone Mill (6.4 mi)
Travilah (7.1 mi)

Seems like could be another option that could sway the county given CJMS is more of a trek and would cause even longer bus times for two schools (SMES and Travilah) as opposed to for just one (Cold Spring).

I understand SMES families might want to keep their children at CJMS but just a consideration.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Did the public hearing on this happen tonight?


Yes, you can watch the video here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DRDRB26D21B7
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Did the public hearing on this happen tonight?


Yes, you can watch the video here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DRDRB26D21B7


Anyone able to summarize? Was it all/mostly anti-H or mixed? Did any Board members say anything interesting?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Did the public hearing on this happen tonight?


Yes, you can watch the video here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DRDRB26D21B7


Anyone able to summarize? Was it all/mostly anti-H or mixed? Did any Board members say anything interesting?


I didn't watch all of it, but there were some comments on either side about H. Some board members asked CO staff for more information about the modified option G that Rockville's mayor proposed.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Question for those at the public meeting tonight arguing that if Modified Option H is implemented that Stone Mill and Travilah both be placed in Cabin John: why not also consider asking for both to be at Hoover? The schools are relatively comparable and Hoover is actually a bit closer to both Stone Mill and Travilah than Cabin John. If they did that they could then just keep Cold Spring at Cabin John, which isn’t too far from it.

Distance to CJMS for each school:

Cold Spring (2.7 mi)
Stone Mill (7.6 mi)
Travilah (8.3 mi)

Distance to Hoover for each:

Cold Spring (1.5 mi)
Stone Mill (6.4 mi)
Travilah (7.1 mi)

Seems like could be another option that could sway the county given CJMS is more of a trek and would cause even longer bus times for two schools (SMES and Travilah) as opposed to for just one (Cold Spring).

I understand SMES families might want to keep their children at CJMS but just a consideration.


I think it was just to maintain stability for Stone Mill, at least one wouldn't change. Also not sure if Hoover had room for both. It made sense to swap Potomac ES and Travilah ES with Hoover from a capacity standpoint. But you're right- if the two schools are together that works too. It's when they are both individually siloed it's bad.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Did the public hearing on this happen tonight?


Yes, you can watch the video here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DRDRB26D21B7


Anyone able to summarize? Was it all/mostly anti-H or mixed? Did any Board members say anything interesting?


Actually a whole lot of support for the recommendation (Modified H) including from some Wootton feeders. There was a joint video from Dufief/Stone Mill/Travilah all supporting.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Did the public hearing on this happen tonight?


Yes, you can watch the video here:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=DRDRB26D21B7


Anyone able to summarize? Was it all/mostly anti-H or mixed? Did any Board members say anything interesting?


Actually a whole lot of support for the recommendation (Modified H) including from some Wootton feeders. There was a joint video from Dufief/Stone Mill/Travilah all supporting.


Good. I'm glad Dufief woke up and realized that the rest of Wootton will sacrifice them without a second thought and they would rather be with Wootton at Crown with one more school than without the rest of Wootton if other options were chosen.
post reply Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Message Quick Reply
Go to: