Boundary study (2025 )

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reshape the entire boundary of Wheaton completely. It is so messed up compared to the other DCC high schools (if you think about Einstein too).

You can't reshape any school's boundary in isolation in the DCC. Part of the problem is that Blair is the only school serving the entire SE portion of the county, and it's nowhere near the area it serves.

It used to be on Wayne but none of the holding schools could support it when they needed renovations. That said there are lots of examples of the edge of a boundary not being horribly close to the school. Blair is no different, Which Park would TP like to give up to build a new school closer?

There are Adventist properties, etc., some of which had been considered and dismissed before they went with reopening Woodward. MCPS & MoCo don't want to pay for that which would be needed --at least not when considering facilities for certain communities.

For a long time, the problem has been Montgomery Planning's willingness to stick it to the southeast of the county -- at the behest of the County Council. MoCo should, at the very least, be reinstating moratoria on housing in areas with overcrowded schools. Instead, Andrew Friedson, Natalie Fani-Gonzalez & Co. are pushing AHS/More Housing N.O.W./etc. without such guardrails, and, absent those, any boundary changes MCPS makes are likely to be far less effective.

The county doesn’t own the Adventist property like they do parks and libraries.

And yet it was among the options considered, along with other properties not owned by the County. Purchase, either by owners offering or, in some cases, by eminent domain, is the avenue, just as businesses purchase and consolidate properties for their expansions (e.g., United Therapitics).

MoCo quite deliberately chose to arrive at this situation for the area over the past 3+ decades, by

1) closing, repurposing, selling and/or locking in long-term private occupation of previously utilized municipal/school properties (and properties that earlier may have been in reserve for such), and

2) allowing overdevelopment.

They continue with the latter but won't spend the $ necessary to make up for the former.

[Anonymous]

Are you posting in 2019? That’s the last time MCPS talked about the Adventist property as a possibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you posting in 2019? That’s the last time MCPS talked about the Adventist property as a possibility.

Let's see, here.

One poster suggests Blair's situation is no different from that of others, and that either we should sacrifice parks in the already dense area or, depending on how one takes the tone, not bother to address the problem because it would have to take parks.

Another points out that the situation, there, is the fault of Montgomery Planning and the County Council, whose actions over decades left ever less tenable and/or more expensive options as the only ones that might be pursued, which, then, of course, are passed over in favor of something elsewhere, as evidenced by the choice not to pursue the options on the table before going with Woodward...and that the current County Council, spearheaded by Friedson and Fani-Gonzalez, are keeping that going with a no-guardrails/no-school-solution AHS/density push that will tend to make the whole redrawing of school boundaries less effective.

And someone then says an option typifying this decades-old pattern of neglect is six+ years old (not that anything newer has been considered aside from further shifting boundaries), as if that somehow negates the observation of ongoing fault? Ooooookaaaaaayyy...

[Anonymous]

I've searched in here, on Google, and on the MCPS boundary study site & slides and found no answer.

Will MS & HS re-assignments resulting from the Charles W. Woodward HS boundary study also re-assign elementary schools as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've searched in here, on Google, and on the MCPS boundary study site & slides and found no answer.

Will MS & HS re-assignments resulting from the Charles W. Woodward HS boundary study also re-assign elementary schools as well?

No. Students will still attend the same ES they do now. But that ES may feed to a different MS and/or a different HS.

[Anonymous]

Is there any formal reason all of the Town of Kensington are attached to the same MCPS cluster?

All houses within the Town of Kensington proper are assigned to Kensington Parkwood ES, North Bethesda Middle, and Walter Johnson HS.

Makes me wonder if any boundary re-assignment would need to re-assign all of the homes in the Town of Kensington or if the homes could be split to different clusters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a child in the DCC gets redistricted to Woodward, are they no longer eligible to participate in the DCC for high school? They are only able to go to Woodward?

Are you concerned they may be treated like the greater majority of clusters in the county?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a child in the DCC gets redistricted to Woodward, are they no longer eligible to participate in the DCC for high school? They are only able to go to Woodward?

Are you concerned they may be treated like the greater majority of clusters in the county?

Or, who knows, they may decide to make Woodward part of the DCC, or part of a new consortium. Many possibilities still TBD.

[Anonymous]

Woodward or WJ may become part of DCC.

1-2 ES schools from DCC should be added in Woordward and WJ both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any formal reason all of the Town of Kensington are attached to the same MCPS cluster?

All houses within the Town of Kensington proper are assigned to Kensington Parkwood ES, North Bethesda Middle, and Walter Johnson HS.

Makes me wonder if any boundary re-assignment would need to re-assign all of the homes in the Town of Kensington or if the homes could be split to different clusters.

Both options are open. Either entire area or a part of area can be assigned to a different school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any formal reason all of the Town of Kensington are attached to the same MCPS cluster?

All houses within the Town of Kensington proper are assigned to Kensington Parkwood ES, North Bethesda Middle, and Walter Johnson HS.

Makes me wonder if any boundary re-assignment would need to re-assign all of the homes in the Town of Kensington or if the homes could be split to different clusters.

The formal reason is that the BOE in 2000 decided to include all of the TOK within the WJ cluster. There's an interesting discussion in the minutes, pages 5-9:

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/boe/meetings/minutes/2000/minutes.032200.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you posting in 2019? That’s the last time MCPS talked about the Adventist property as a possibility.

Let's see, here.

One poster suggests Blair's situation is no different from that of others, and that either we should sacrifice parks in the already dense area or, depending on how one takes the tone, not bother to address the problem because it would have to take parks.

Another points out that the situation, there, is the fault of Montgomery Planning and the County Council, whose actions over decades left ever less tenable and/or more expensive options as the only ones that might be pursued, which, then, of course, are passed over in favor of something elsewhere, as evidenced by the choice not to pursue the options on the table before going with Woodward...and that the current County Council, spearheaded by Friedson and Fani-Gonzalez, are keeping that going with a no-guardrails/no-school-solution AHS/density push that will tend to make the whole redrawing of school boundaries less effective.

And someone then says an option typifying this decades-old pattern of neglect is six+ years old (not that anything newer has been considered aside from further shifting boundaries), as if that somehow negates the observation of ongoing fault? Ooooookaaaaaayyy...

It's possible to make more room at Blair. Just move the Magnet program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you posting in 2019? That’s the last time MCPS talked about the Adventist property as a possibility.

Let's see, here.

One poster suggests Blair's situation is no different from that of others, and that either we should sacrifice parks in the already dense area or, depending on how one takes the tone, not bother to address the problem because it would have to take parks.

Another points out that the situation, there, is the fault of Montgomery Planning and the County Council, whose actions over decades left ever less tenable and/or more expensive options as the only ones that might be pursued, which, then, of course, are passed over in favor of something elsewhere, as evidenced by the choice not to pursue the options on the table before going with Woodward...and that the current County Council, spearheaded by Friedson and Fani-Gonzalez, are keeping that going with a no-guardrails/no-school-solution AHS/density push that will tend to make the whole redrawing of school boundaries less effective.

And someone then says an option typifying this decades-old pattern of neglect is six+ years old (not that anything newer has been considered aside from further shifting boundaries), as if that somehow negates the observation of ongoing fault? Ooooookaaaaaayyy...

It's possible to make more room at Blair. Just move the Magnet program.

Blair is over capacity by about the same number of students in the magnet. Why not move them to the new Northwood? Fewer boundaries would need to be shifted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you posting in 2019? That’s the last time MCPS talked about the Adventist property as a possibility.

Let's see, here.

One poster suggests Blair's situation is no different from that of others, and that either we should sacrifice parks in the already dense area or, depending on how one takes the tone, not bother to address the problem because it would have to take parks.

Another points out that the situation, there, is the fault of Montgomery Planning and the County Council, whose actions over decades left ever less tenable and/or more expensive options as the only ones that might be pursued, which, then, of course, are passed over in favor of something elsewhere, as evidenced by the choice not to pursue the options on the table before going with Woodward...and that the current County Council, spearheaded by Friedson and Fani-Gonzalez, are keeping that going with a no-guardrails/no-school-solution AHS/density push that will tend to make the whole redrawing of school boundaries less effective.

And someone then says an option typifying this decades-old pattern of neglect is six+ years old (not that anything newer has been considered aside from further shifting boundaries), as if that somehow negates the observation of ongoing fault? Ooooookaaaaaayyy...

It's possible to make more room at Blair. Just move the Magnet program.

If moved, the programs should go to Kennedy. It is the only undercapacity DCC, and needs a larger cohort of higher-performing academics to facilitate its attraction as a regional IB, which is more compatible with those than either Northwood or Einstein would be. With the development noted, Northwood's expansion will be eaten up by ever-continuing increases in its own catchment, as well as overflow from the neighboring Blair and Einstein catchments. Blair could still offer high-level options due to its sheer size, though perhaps fewer periods of such.

Of course, even with Northwood's expansion, the population projections not counting the additional development would see all of the DCC schools overcrowded with that scenario, and shifts of some boundaries to articulate some proximate DCC students to the newly reopened Woodward, BCC (with knock-on shifts to Whitman) and/or WJ (once relieved by Woodward) are inevitable. The W dream of a Bethesda/Potomac/Chevy Chase-area school hosting the down-county SMACS magnet is DOA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there any formal reason all of the Town of Kensington are attached to the same MCPS cluster?

All houses within the Town of Kensington proper are assigned to Kensington Parkwood ES, North Bethesda Middle, and Walter Johnson HS.

Makes me wonder if any boundary re-assignment would need to re-assign all of the homes in the Town of Kensington or if the homes could be split to different clusters.

They aren’t. Some are bcc.