Boundary study- how will Whitman be impacted (s/o)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why would they move currently assigned Whitman kids to Walter Johnson? Walter Johnson is part of the overcrowding problem and Whitman is under capacity.

Because Equity. Overcrowding isn’t the problem the BOE is trying to solve for based on all of the public statements I’ve heard from them about how much of an opportunity this is to make transformational change in access, equity and diversity.

A foolish statement, given that the reason for the boundary study is that MCPS IS BUILDING A WHOLE NEW HIGH SCHOOL.

Have you watched the board meetings and listened to the public statements made by board members? Nothing is being said about overcrowding. Sure, a new school needs to be filled but if that was the narrow purpose of the boundary change analysis they wouldn’t have had to include all of the schools in the analysis. When people like Dan Reed and Jill Ortman Fouse start testifying like they recently have been, no one can claim with a straight face that this analysis is anything but another bite at the redistricting apple that the board failed so miserably on just before Covid. Heck, MCPS policy requires them to prioritize demographics and equity above all else in these studies. Try to learn a bit, pay attention and catch up on some old meetings via YouTube before you start saying that folks are foolish to believe this is simply an exercise in balancing overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why would they move currently assigned Whitman kids to Walter Johnson? Walter Johnson is part of the overcrowding problem and Whitman is under capacity.

Because Equity. Overcrowding isn’t the problem the BOE is trying to solve for based on all of the public statements I’ve heard from them about how much of an opportunity this is to make transformational change in access, equity and diversity.

A foolish statement, given that the reason for the boundary study is that MCPS IS BUILDING A WHOLE NEW HIGH SCHOOL.

Have you watched the board meetings and listened to the public statements made by board members? Nothing is being said about overcrowding. Sure, a new school needs to be filled but if that was the narrow purpose of the boundary change analysis they wouldn’t have had to include all of the schools in the analysis. When people like Dan Reed and Jill Ortman Fouse start testifying like they recently have been, no one can claim with a straight face that this analysis is anything but another bite at the redistricting apple that the board failed so miserably on just before Covid. Heck, MCPS policy requires them to prioritize demographics and equity above all else in these studies. Try to learn a bit, pay attention and catch up on some old meetings via YouTube before you start saying that folks are foolish to believe this is simply an exercise in balancing overcrowding.

DP. I have been watching the board meetings and listening to the public statements, and yes they have been saying a lot about overcrowding, in addition to the other factors, including demographics. It makes perfect sense to include BCC and Whitman in the study not only because of demographics but also because they both have some space available, and Woodward plus the new Northwood building will not provide sufficient relief from the WJ and DCC overcrowding. Not to mention all of the opportunities to increase the number of walkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why would they move currently assigned Whitman kids to Walter Johnson? Walter Johnson is part of the overcrowding problem and Whitman is under capacity.

Because Equity. Overcrowding isn’t the problem the BOE is trying to solve for based on all of the public statements I’ve heard from them about how much of an opportunity this is to make transformational change in access, equity and diversity.

A foolish statement, given that the reason for the boundary study is that MCPS IS BUILDING A WHOLE NEW HIGH SCHOOL.

Have you watched the board meetings and listened to the public statements made by board members? Nothing is being said about overcrowding. Sure, a new school needs to be filled but if that was the narrow purpose of the boundary change analysis they wouldn’t have had to include all of the schools in the analysis. When people like Dan Reed and Jill Ortman Fouse start testifying like they recently have been, no one can claim with a straight face that this analysis is anything but another bite at the redistricting apple that the board failed so miserably on just before Covid. Heck, MCPS policy requires them to prioritize demographics and equity above all else in these studies. Try to learn a bit, pay attention and catch up on some old meetings via YouTube before you start saying that folks are foolish to believe this is simply an exercise in balancing overcrowding.

So will Wootton be part of the Crown study? It has the most odd boundary of any MCPS school.

DP. I have been watching the board meetings and listening to the public statements, and yes they have been saying a lot about overcrowding, in addition to the other factors, including demographics. It makes perfect sense to include BCC and Whitman in the study not only because of demographics but also because they both have some space available, and Woodward plus the new Northwood building will not provide sufficient relief from the WJ and DCC overcrowding. Not to mention all of the opportunities to increase the number of walkers.

[Anonymous]

So will Wootton be part of the Crown study? It has the most odd boundary of any MCPS school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So will Wootton be part of the Crown study? It has the most odd boundary of any MCPS school.

Yes, Wootton will be part of the Crown study.

[Anonymous]

Yes, unless you are in walk zone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you are in walk zone.

For all the schools? If you’re in the walk zone you won’t be re zoned?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you are in walk zone.

For all the schools? If you’re in the walk zone you won’t be re zoned?

Walk zones are not likely to get rezoned. It's also costly for MCPS. I am saying this based on previous involvement with boundary change in MCPS. In RM cluster, MCPS left the walk zone untouched even though it created on school with very low FARMS and one with very high FARMS. This was when balancing FARMS was a priority.

Outside of Walk zone, everything can be changed. Now you can look at location and school to make an educated guess, some places are more likely to change than others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you are in walk zone.

For all the schools? If you’re in the walk zone you won’t be re zoned?

Walk zones are not likely to get rezoned. It's also costly for MCPS. I am saying this based on previous involvement with boundary change in MCPS. In RM cluster, MCPS left the walk zone untouched even though it created on school with very low FARMS and one with very high FARMS. This was when balancing FARMS was a priority.

Outside of Walk zone, everything can be changed. Now you can look at location and school to make an educated guess, some places are more likely to change than others.

So how do you know where the walk zones are? Is there a map of the walk zones for Whitman?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why would they move currently assigned Whitman kids to Walter Johnson? Walter Johnson is part of the overcrowding problem and Whitman is under capacity.

Because Equity. Overcrowding isn’t the problem the BOE is trying to solve for based on all of the public statements I’ve heard from them about how much of an opportunity this is to make transformational change in access, equity and diversity.

A foolish statement, given that the reason for the boundary study is that MCPS IS BUILDING A WHOLE NEW HIGH SCHOOL.

Have you watched the board meetings and listened to the public statements made by board members? Nothing is being said about overcrowding. Sure, a new school needs to be filled but if that was the narrow purpose of the boundary change analysis they wouldn’t have had to include all of the schools in the analysis. When people like Dan Reed and Jill Ortman Fouse start testifying like they recently have been, no one can claim with a straight face that this analysis is anything but another bite at the redistricting apple that the board failed so miserably on just before Covid. Heck, MCPS policy requires them to prioritize demographics and equity above all else in these studies. Try to learn a bit, pay attention and catch up on some old meetings via YouTube before you start saying that folks are foolish to believe this is simply an exercise in balancing overcrowding.

This was a lie in 2019, and it is even more of a lie now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you are in walk zone.

For all the schools? If you’re in the walk zone you won’t be re zoned?

Walk zones are not likely to get rezoned. It's also costly for MCPS. I am saying this based on previous involvement with boundary change in MCPS. In RM cluster, MCPS left the walk zone untouched even though it created on school with very low FARMS and one with very high FARMS. This was when balancing FARMS was a priority.

Outside of Walk zone, everything can be changed. Now you can look at location and school to make an educated guess, some places are more likely to change than others.

So how do you know where the walk zones are? Is there a map of the walk zones for Whitman?

I am not sure if there is map, but if kids don't get bus service then its a walk zone. I think for high school it's 2Miles of radius for walking. I could be wrong so check with school.

If you are interested in some house then I will first find out if kids there get bus, if not then you can be sure about it's being in walk zone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you are in walk zone.

For all the schools? If you’re in the walk zone you won’t be re zoned?

Walk zones are not likely to get rezoned. It's also costly for MCPS. I am saying this based on previous involvement with boundary change in MCPS. In RM cluster, MCPS left the walk zone untouched even though it created on school with very low FARMS and one with very high FARMS. This was when balancing FARMS was a priority.

Outside of Walk zone, everything can be changed. Now you can look at location and school to make an educated guess, some places are more likely to change than others.

So how do you know where the walk zones are? Is there a map of the walk zones for Whitman?

I am not sure if there is map, but if kids don't get bus service then its a walk zone. I think for high school it's 2Miles of radius for walking. I could be wrong so check with school.

If you are interested in some house then I will first find out if kids there get bus, if not then you can be sure about it's being in walk zone.

But that could change. MCPS could decide a walk zone is no longer a walk zone, and assign a bus and have them go to another school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why would they move currently assigned Whitman kids to Walter Johnson? Walter Johnson is part of the overcrowding problem and Whitman is under capacity.

Because Equity. Overcrowding isn’t the problem the BOE is trying to solve for based on all of the public statements I’ve heard from them about how much of an opportunity this is to make transformational change in access, equity and diversity.

A foolish statement, given that the reason for the boundary study is that MCPS IS BUILDING A WHOLE NEW HIGH SCHOOL.

Have you watched the board meetings and listened to the public statements made by board members? Nothing is being said about overcrowding. Sure, a new school needs to be filled but if that was the narrow purpose of the boundary change analysis they wouldn’t have had to include all of the schools in the analysis. When people like Dan Reed and Jill Ortman Fouse start testifying like they recently have been, no one can claim with a straight face that this analysis is anything but another bite at the redistricting apple that the board failed so miserably on just before Covid. Heck, MCPS policy requires them to prioritize demographics and equity above all else in these studies. Try to learn a bit, pay attention and catch up on some old meetings via YouTube before you start saying that folks are foolish to believe this is simply an exercise in balancing overcrowding.

This was a lie in 2019, and it is even more of a lie now.

And this response was a lame retort in 2019 and it is even more of a lame retort now. Just because the chickens came home to roost doesn’t mean you can disavow all of the effort and the actual language of the policy that states that the BOE must especially weigh demographics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, unless you are in walk zone.

For all the schools? If you’re in the walk zone you won’t be re zoned?

Walk zones are not likely to get rezoned. It's also costly for MCPS. I am saying this based on previous involvement with boundary change in MCPS. In RM cluster, MCPS left the walk zone untouched even though it created on school with very low FARMS and one with very high FARMS. This was when balancing FARMS was a priority.

Outside of Walk zone, everything can be changed. Now you can look at location and school to make an educated guess, some places are more likely to change than others.

So how do you know where the walk zones are? Is there a map of the walk zones for Whitman?

I am not sure if there is map, but if kids don't get bus service then its a walk zone. I think for high school it's 2Miles of radius for walking. I could be wrong so check with school.

If you are interested in some house then I will first find out if kids there get bus, if not then you can be sure about it's being in walk zone.

But that could change. MCPS could decide a walk zone is no longer a walk zone, and assign a bus and have them go to another school.

MCPS certainly could choose to reassign an area in School A's walk zone to School B's bus zone. But MCPS has not done so in any recent boundary study. In fact, MCPS has gone to a lot of effort and complication to avoid doing so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But why would they move currently assigned Whitman kids to Walter Johnson? Walter Johnson is part of the overcrowding problem and Whitman is under capacity.

Because Equity. Overcrowding isn’t the problem the BOE is trying to solve for based on all of the public statements I’ve heard from them about how much of an opportunity this is to make transformational change in access, equity and diversity.

A foolish statement, given that the reason for the boundary study is that MCPS IS BUILDING A WHOLE NEW HIGH SCHOOL.

Have you watched the board meetings and listened to the public statements made by board members? Nothing is being said about overcrowding. Sure, a new school needs to be filled but if that was the narrow purpose of the boundary change analysis they wouldn’t have had to include all of the schools in the analysis. When people like Dan Reed and Jill Ortman Fouse start testifying like they recently have been, no one can claim with a straight face that this analysis is anything but another bite at the redistricting apple that the board failed so miserably on just before Covid. Heck, MCPS policy requires them to prioritize demographics and equity above all else in these studies. Try to learn a bit, pay attention and catch up on some old meetings via YouTube before you start saying that folks are foolish to believe this is simply an exercise in balancing overcrowding.

This was a lie in 2019, and it is even more of a lie now.

And this response was a lame retort in 2019 and it is even more of a lame retort now. Just because the chickens came home to roost doesn’t mean you can disavow all of the effort and the actual language of the policy that states that the BOE must especially weigh demographics

Are you still posting from 2019? The rest of us have not just read the regulation, WHICH DOES NOT SAY WHAT YOU SAY IT SAYS, but have also followed all of the boundary studies that MCPS has done since then, WHICH HAVE NOT DONE WHAT YOU SAY THE POLICY REQUIRES.

Keep lying if you want to, but I have no idea why you would want to.