Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
The committee meeting last night also saw the admission that the numbers in the Superintendent's recommendation were really off. According to their updated numbers the FARMS rate at RMES5 would be 29.5% without separating out Chinese Immersion.
I still think there are better options that address capacity, proximity, and minimizing how many neighborhoods are changing schools, but I think the Superintendent's error is pretty egregious and the community deserves an apology. |
Anonymous
The irony in that is RMES having a 42% FARMS also due to their walkable location is somehow not right, which started this whole process all over again. So then we have insane options like #3 which busses kids all over the city, in an already traffic-congested area. |
Anonymous
| I don't understand the updated version of Option #8 of moving RP5 out of Ritchie Park. If RP's FARM rate would only go up by 4%, keeping RP2 and RP6, why wouldn't they just keep them going to RM#5 since the areas are walkable to RM#5? It also keeps RP at 98% capacity while Beall and RM#5 are below 85% capacity. That makes no sense to me. |
Anonymous
Actually at the meeting last night MCPS admitted they made FARMS mistake and the rate for original superintendant's rec is 29.5%. Granted, at this point after a year of constant "mistakes" from MCPS stuff I have no clue which numbers are actually correct. |
Anonymous
I agree. The numbers keep changing. Like every single time. I am not sure why they can't figure this out. Can they just have an IB student from RM come over and do the percentages for them?  They look pathetic.
|
Anonymous
no.. because apparently RMIB is being watered down, according to some posters, so it's now full of not so smart kids. Sorry.. I know.. off topic. Back to the topic... if they are willing to break up zones and have a domino affect, why not break up Fallsgrove. Send some to ES#5 and others to CG. And B4 could go to CG, too. Wouldn't that distribute FARMS better? Option 7 has CG FARMS at 14% while other ESs have rates over 20%. |
Anonymous
Wait, so you want Twinbrook to keep their high FARMS because of their neighborhood proximity, but you think RP at 7% will be an "elite" school, so you are okay with walkable areas for RM#5 (and were initially boundaries for Beall) stay at RP so their FARMS stays at a "non-elite" rate? The only reason why RP had 20% FARMS was because of RP2 and 6 were rezoned for RP about 15 years ago. Prior to that, they were 0% Like in none. RP2 and RP6 are right next to where they are building RM#5. That is where they should go. That is not the fault of the rest of RP's location and surrounding neighborhoods. Keeping Fallsgrove actually keeps us at 7% since they have MPDU. But the neighborhoods close to RP? They just don't have FARMS. They are single family colonials. Can you name one other school around those RP neighborhoods that does not have a low FARM rate? Cold Spring 1.8% Fallsmeade 8% Lakewood 6.6% Beverly Farms <3.5% Again, the witch hunt for RP to be higher FARMS is really starting to piss me off. When it moved to 12.5% for most of the options, people went nuts. Why isn't anyone up in arms about CG only have 14% all of these years? |
Anonymous
| Maybe MCPS should put a red flag on each FARM household on a map and draw lines in between them to evently distribute the FARM families. |
Anonymous
I don't live in Fallsgrove but I am very much against that. They did that to Kings Farm and it is not right. Those neighborhoods have huge HOA with a lot of involvement. Those kids play and hang out together for years prior to school. To divide them between 2 schools, even for just elementary school doesn't seem right. Fallsgrove is off the beaten path of the entire cluster. They need to keep them together. Also, if you split them, you would have to split the condo/apartments down the middle since they house the low income families. That would just be wrong. I also think moving CG3 out of College Gardens is wrong. That feels like another neighborhood begin split up. And most options for Twinbrook pulls kids in tiny sections away from all of their neighbors going to the walkable school. |
Anonymous
That is exactly what that crazy lady last night wanted. 
|
Anonymous
| I can't wait to enjoy the walk/bike to school days with Option #3. Oh wait.... |
Anonymous
The community responded because the Superintendent recommended an option that was so far afield from the original 8 options discussed, and with completely bogus numbers. |
Anonymous
|
Why don't any of the options have RP 5 going to Beall or CG? Is there a reason that area has to be bused so far? Surely if that was moved to let's say, CG and some of CG was moved to Beall then some of Beall could go to RMES #5 and one of their lower income zones can go to RP to at least give it a 10% FARMS rate?
|
Anonymous
waiting for an answer to this |
Anonymous
Wait, they should also mark each household's race with piick, green, orange flags. |