3/9 and 3/10 public hearings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people from Magruder there testifying. Also a bunch from SSIMS.

I wonder why MCPS did not point to the additional out-of-bounds immersion students to explain that SSIMS will actually still be around average size for MCPS middle schools? It's a weird omission....

The concerns expressed about RM's numbers offer an analogy. The current attendance, overcapacity, reflects a relatively larger magnet population than the expected differential (small, with nearly as many leaving for other magnets as coming in) from home-catchment populations projected (themselves declining with the overall school-aged population trend) in the out year of the boundary study. Yet some RM stakeholders (and some of those from Wootton grasping at straws) can't wrap their heads around that.

On the other hand, as another poster noted, there might be only French Immersion (if that) continuing at SSIMS, and of the 100-120 across three grades, there, many would come from the proposed home catchment. They might get a bump of 30-50 students, at most, in that case.

But that "expected differential" is based on assumptions (MCPS 's word, not mine). They still have not surveyed families and just made up numbers that are not reflective of past trends. You know what happens when you assume...

Sure, but every model incorporates assumptions, and those stakeholders railing against the recommendation, instead of taking that model, and the resulting difference it explains, into account and then discussing where the assumptions might be wrong, are arguing numbers that don't take the difference between current attendance and model-based projected attendance into account at all.

[Anonymous]

I heard that BOE members were completely checked out this week. Some didn't show up, or showed up late. And that the SMOB won't be there to vote at the Board meeting because she's traveling for spring break early.

What a circus. This is a joke of a process. And I'm not complaining about the outcome for my kids. But this is not what serious people do.

[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:I watched yesterday's video recording, and it was not a pleasant experience. BOE chose to let the CO staff to defend their projection, whereas Wootton parents insisted their data were flawed. So they ended up in stuck, and BOE apparently firmly believed in the former. It's a lost war to me from a spectator's perspective.

That sets up the BOE’s decision as being arbitrary and capricious. Disregarding clear data flaws is the very definition. If the BOE were smart (and honest) it would redo its numbers. But that would mean Wootton can’t move to Crown in the fall of 2027.

The data doesn’t seem flawed. I’ve watched all the presentations even the joint one with planning board. It all seems very defensible and would withstand legal challenge.

A court looks at everything - it’s not obligated to believe anyone.

Uh no.
No, they look at the record before it. And will defer to policy makers when reasoned. Seems reasoned here. I wouldn’t want to be the one wasting money on this suit. MCPS will win despite you not liking it.

Suing because you didn’t get the outcome you wanted is such a waste of money…why won’t they learn that MCPS and the BOE can make these decisions? They choose to give communities a voice…it doesn’t mean they have to agree with what is said.

Lawsuits will turn up corruption. This whole process has been bizarre and there is no logical argument as to why Wootton should close but Magruder remain open. Hold them to the fire and let’s see what turns up.

And then this board will light up complaining about all the money MCPS spent on lawsuits…it’s like a full circle, that we end up causing.

If everything is on the up and up, why is MCPS (and posters on DCUM) afraid of what it might uncover? If there’s such confidence, then the case should get dismissed quickly, so little to no legal expenses. Then again, MCPS blew millions on a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court when if had a very inexpensive alternative it could have taken (but flatly refused, even though it had done it before).

This logic is so faulty. Filing lawsuits because you don’t like something and want to see what if “something sticks.”

Do you welcome any and all lawsuits that anybody could file against you in your personal and professional capacity because you are confident you have done nothing wrong?

Or maybe do you see it as a wasteful drain on time and resources?

Litigation is often the only way for the truth to come out. Maybe MCPS should have thought about the risk of litigation before it cooked up Option H and tried to sneak it past everyone over the holidays? Why do that if it was perfectly legal? Why fear litigation if MCPS is right? Indeed, the case should get dismissed quickly if MCPS is right.

Then again, MCPS thought it was right until the Supreme Court told it that it was dead wrong. Likewise, MCPS broke the rules when it bought EV buses. Seems like MCPS can get important matters very wrong.

People keep trying to make this point that they snuck it in before the holidays and no one had a chance to comment or respond to it. This is demonstrably false. There was a survey, which a lot of people in the Wootton cluster responded to, and there have been public meetings. They can’t make people engage.

Go ahead and tell us what the survey results were. And while you’re at it, what was the community’s response at the public meetings? They didn’t have to make anyone engage - sneaking in Option H in early December guaranteed community response would be delayed until after the 1st of the year. Then a snowstorm hit and meetings were canceled.

So yeah, MCPS gave little time for a response. But when that response came, it was loud and unequivocal but MCPS ignored it anyway.

Just because the opposition is loud, doesn't mean MCPS or the BOE needs to follow it.

MCPS has already incorporated feedback into the process (moving Cold Spring into Churchill, moved Fields Road to Wootton). They've held multiple meetings and took many survey results. There's been a robust debate between all the stakeholders.

This kind of decision isn't decided by whether a school population supports it or not; there's going to be various trade-offs of any decision, even maintaining the status quo.

MCPS and BOE need to make decisions based on the entire county holistically and not let the process to be hijacked by an outspoken minority.

The survey has come out overwhelmingly against the proposal. It has been dismissed as manipulated.

And yet it aligns with the meetings held have been filled with people who vehemently opposed to the proposal.

All because MCPS and BOE obviously decided the outcome on their own, outside the process, because they think they know better.

Subverting the will of the community is unacceptable. It's unacceptable at the national level and it's unacceptable at the local level. This was not done properly, full stop, and the community has shown it is not going to roll over on this. It's time to go back to the drawing board.

[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:I watched yesterday's video recording, and it was not a pleasant experience. BOE chose to let the CO staff to defend their projection, whereas Wootton parents insisted their data were flawed. So they ended up in stuck, and BOE apparently firmly believed in the former. It's a lost war to me from a spectator's perspective.

That sets up the BOE’s decision as being arbitrary and capricious. Disregarding clear data flaws is the very definition. If the BOE were smart (and honest) it would redo its numbers. But that would mean Wootton can’t move to Crown in the fall of 2027.

The data doesn’t seem flawed. I’ve watched all the presentations even the joint one with planning board. It all seems very defensible and would withstand legal challenge.

A court looks at everything - it’s not obligated to believe anyone.

Uh no.
No, they look at the record before it. And will defer to policy makers when reasoned. Seems reasoned here. I wouldn’t want to be the one wasting money on this suit. MCPS will win despite you not liking it.

Suing because you didn’t get the outcome you wanted is such a waste of money…why won’t they learn that MCPS and the BOE can make these decisions? They choose to give communities a voice…it doesn’t mean they have to agree with what is said.

Lawsuits will turn up corruption. This whole process has been bizarre and there is no logical argument as to why Wootton should close but Magruder remain open. Hold them to the fire and let’s see what turns up.

And then this board will light up complaining about all the money MCPS spent on lawsuits…it’s like a full circle, that we end up causing.

If everything is on the up and up, why is MCPS (and posters on DCUM) afraid of what it might uncover? If there’s such confidence, then the case should get dismissed quickly, so little to no legal expenses. Then again, MCPS blew millions on a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court when if had a very inexpensive alternative it could have taken (but flatly refused, even though it had done it before).

This logic is so faulty. Filing lawsuits because you don’t like something and want to see what if “something sticks.”

Do you welcome any and all lawsuits that anybody could file against you in your personal and professional capacity because you are confident you have done nothing wrong?

Or maybe do you see it as a wasteful drain on time and resources?

Litigation is often the only way for the truth to come out. Maybe MCPS should have thought about the risk of litigation before it cooked up Option H and tried to sneak it past everyone over the holidays? Why do that if it was perfectly legal? Why fear litigation if MCPS is right? Indeed, the case should get dismissed quickly if MCPS is right.

Then again, MCPS thought it was right until the Supreme Court told it that it was dead wrong. Likewise, MCPS broke the rules when it bought EV buses. Seems like MCPS can get important matters very wrong.

People keep trying to make this point that they snuck it in before the holidays and no one had a chance to comment or respond to it. This is demonstrably false. There was a survey, which a lot of people in the Wootton cluster responded to, and there have been public meetings. They can’t make people engage.

Go ahead and tell us what the survey results were. And while you’re at it, what was the community’s response at the public meetings? They didn’t have to make anyone engage - sneaking in Option H in early December guaranteed community response would be delayed until after the 1st of the year. Then a snowstorm hit and meetings were canceled.

So yeah, MCPS gave little time for a response. But when that response came, it was loud and unequivocal but MCPS ignored it anyway.

Just because the opposition is loud, doesn't mean MCPS or the BOE needs to follow it.

MCPS has already incorporated feedback into the process (moving Cold Spring into Churchill, moved Fields Road to Wootton). They've held multiple meetings and took many survey results. There's been a robust debate between all the stakeholders.

This kind of decision isn't decided by whether a school population supports it or not; there's going to be various trade-offs of any decision, even maintaining the status quo.

MCPS and BOE need to make decisions based on the entire county holistically and not let the process to be hijacked by an outspoken minority.

And they don’t need to abide by decisions of the State Board of Education, the Maryland Appellate Court, the Inspector General or even the results of an audit they paid for.

They are the supreme ruler of the public schools and they answer to no one.

The BOE makes a decision, but there are no consequences if it’s wrong or it’s caught doing something illegal. It had to pay $1.5M to the plaintiffs the Mahmoud book case that went all the way to the Supreme Court (when there was an easy, no-cost option), on top of millions in legal fees. Likewise, it spent $100M on EV buses it shouldn’t have. These monies could have prevented the current situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people from Magruder there testifying. Also a bunch from SSIMS.

I wonder why MCPS did not point to the additional out-of-bounds immersion students to explain that SSIMS will actually still be around average size for MCPS middle schools? It's a weird omission....

The concerns expressed about RM's numbers offer an analogy. The current attendance, overcapacity, reflects a relatively larger magnet population than the expected differential (small, with nearly as many leaving for other magnets as coming in) from home-catchment populations projected (themselves declining with the overall school-aged population trend) in the out year of the boundary study. Yet some RM stakeholders (and some of those from Wootton grasping at straws) can't wrap their heads around that.

On the other hand, as another poster noted, there might be only French Immersion (if that) continuing at SSIMS, and of the 100-120 across three grades, there, many would come from the proposed home catchment. They might get a bump of 30-50 students, at most, in that case.

But that "expected differential" is based on assumptions (MCPS 's word, not mine). They still have not surveyed families and just made up numbers that are not reflective of past trends. You know what happens when you assume...

Sure, but every model incorporates assumptions, and those stakeholders railing against the recommendation, instead of taking that model, and the resulting difference it explains, into account and then discussing where the assumptions might be wrong, are arguing numbers that don't take the difference between current attendance and model-based projected attendance into account at all.

That's fair. I'm more concerned that the regional model numbers need more research. Per MCPS, RM currently has 34 students leaving for regional/criterion referenced programs. Based on their recent slides, they are estimating 494 students will leave for other programs. RM is keeping the IB program. What makes them think they will suddenly have 14 times more students leaving for programs at other schools? The regional model is proposing high school to high school busing only and many RM communities are not walkable to RM. MCPS has provided zero justification for these estimates except "*predicted model that students will be evenly distributed from each of region schools (assumes that students will enroll in programs they applied for outside of school and that there will be an increase in application, and enrollment due to proximity and bustransportation services w/in regions)." If their prediction is wrong, and number of students opting to leave RM remains in line with the <2% that leave now, but RMIB continues to be popular, RM will indeed remain overcapacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of people from Magruder there testifying. Also a bunch from SSIMS.

I wonder why MCPS did not point to the additional out-of-bounds immersion students to explain that SSIMS will actually still be around average size for MCPS middle schools? It's a weird omission....

The concerns expressed about RM's numbers offer an analogy. The current attendance, overcapacity, reflects a relatively larger magnet population than the expected differential (small, with nearly as many leaving for other magnets as coming in) from home-catchment populations projected (themselves declining with the overall school-aged population trend) in the out year of the boundary study. Yet some RM stakeholders (and some of those from Wootton grasping at straws) can't wrap their heads around that.

On the other hand, as another poster noted, there might be only French Immersion (if that) continuing at SSIMS, and of the 100-120 across three grades, there, many would come from the proposed home catchment. They might get a bump of 30-50 students, at most, in that case.

But that "expected differential" is based on assumptions (MCPS 's word, not mine). They still have not surveyed families and just made up numbers that are not reflective of past trends. You know what happens when you assume...

Sure, but every model incorporates assumptions, and those stakeholders railing against the recommendation, instead of taking that model, and the resulting difference it explains, into account and then discussing where the assumptions might be wrong, are arguing numbers that don't take the difference between current attendance and model-based projected attendance into account at all.

That's fair. I'm more concerned that the regional model numbers need more research. Per MCPS, RM currently has 34 students leaving for regional/criterion referenced programs. Based on their recent slides, they are estimating 494 students will leave for other programs. RM is keeping the IB program. What makes them think they will suddenly have 14 times more students leaving for programs at other schools? The regional model is proposing high school to high school busing only and many RM communities are not walkable to RM. MCPS has provided zero justification for these estimates except "*predicted model that students will be evenly distributed from each of region schools (assumes that students will enroll in programs they applied for outside of school and that there will be an increase in application, and enrollment due to proximity and bustransportation services w/in regions)." If their prediction is wrong, and number of students opting to leave RM remains in line with the <2% that leave now, but RMIB continues to be popular, RM will indeed remain overcapacity.

Yes. I saw in Mr. O's presentation that he used this equal distribution assumption to justify moving the musical program from Churchill to RM, which will make RM even more crowded in the future.

[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:I watched yesterday's video recording, and it was not a pleasant experience. BOE chose to let the CO staff to defend their projection, whereas Wootton parents insisted their data were flawed. So they ended up in stuck, and BOE apparently firmly believed in the former. It's a lost war to me from a spectator's perspective.

That sets up the BOE’s decision as being arbitrary and capricious. Disregarding clear data flaws is the very definition. If the BOE were smart (and honest) it would redo its numbers. But that would mean Wootton can’t move to Crown in the fall of 2027.

The data doesn’t seem flawed. I’ve watched all the presentations even the joint one with planning board. It all seems very defensible and would withstand legal challenge.

A court looks at everything - it’s not obligated to believe anyone.

Uh no.
No, they look at the record before it. And will defer to policy makers when reasoned. Seems reasoned here. I wouldn’t want to be the one wasting money on this suit. MCPS will win despite you not liking it.

Suing because you didn’t get the outcome you wanted is such a waste of money…why won’t they learn that MCPS and the BOE can make these decisions? They choose to give communities a voice…it doesn’t mean they have to agree with what is said.

Lawsuits will turn up corruption. This whole process has been bizarre and there is no logical argument as to why Wootton should close but Magruder remain open. Hold them to the fire and let’s see what turns up.

And then this board will light up complaining about all the money MCPS spent on lawsuits…it’s like a full circle, that we end up causing.

If everything is on the up and up, why is MCPS (and posters on DCUM) afraid of what it might uncover? If there’s such confidence, then the case should get dismissed quickly, so little to no legal expenses. Then again, MCPS blew millions on a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court when if had a very inexpensive alternative it could have taken (but flatly refused, even though it had done it before).

This logic is so faulty. Filing lawsuits because you don’t like something and want to see what if “something sticks.”

Do you welcome any and all lawsuits that anybody could file against you in your personal and professional capacity because you are confident you have done nothing wrong?

Or maybe do you see it as a wasteful drain on time and resources?

Litigation is often the only way for the truth to come out. Maybe MCPS should have thought about the risk of litigation before it cooked up Option H and tried to sneak it past everyone over the holidays? Why do that if it was perfectly legal? Why fear litigation if MCPS is right? Indeed, the case should get dismissed quickly if MCPS is right.

Then again, MCPS thought it was right until the Supreme Court told it that it was dead wrong. Likewise, MCPS broke the rules when it bought EV buses. Seems like MCPS can get important matters very wrong.

People keep trying to make this point that they snuck it in before the holidays and no one had a chance to comment or respond to it. This is demonstrably false. There was a survey, which a lot of people in the Wootton cluster responded to, and there have been public meetings. They can’t make people engage.

Go ahead and tell us what the survey results were. And while you’re at it, what was the community’s response at the public meetings? They didn’t have to make anyone engage - sneaking in Option H in early December guaranteed community response would be delayed until after the 1st of the year. Then a snowstorm hit and meetings were canceled.

So yeah, MCPS gave little time for a response. But when that response came, it was loud and unequivocal but MCPS ignored it anyway.

Just because the opposition is loud, doesn't mean MCPS or the BOE needs to follow it.

MCPS has already incorporated feedback into the process (moving Cold Spring into Churchill, moved Fields Road to Wootton). They've held multiple meetings and took many survey results. There's been a robust debate between all the stakeholders.

This kind of decision isn't decided by whether a school population supports it or not; there's going to be various trade-offs of any decision, even maintaining the status quo.

MCPS and BOE need to make decisions based on the entire county holistically and not let the process to be hijacked by an outspoken minority.

The survey has come out overwhelmingly against the proposal. It has been dismissed as manipulated.

And yet it aligns with the meetings held have been filled with people who vehemently opposed to the proposal.

All because MCPS and BOE obviously decided the outcome on their own, outside the process, because they think they know better.

Subverting the will of the community is unacceptable. It's unacceptable at the national level and it's unacceptable at the local level. This was not done properly, full stop, and the community has shown it is not going to roll over on this. It's time to go back to the drawing board.

I understand, to a point, that Wootton parents are worried about change and it really comes from the concern about your kids and their education. That’s important and feels very personal.

That said, from the outside, this proposal makes sense. You’ll still have a great school and a much better building and the school district can use the brand new building it paid for. Unless there’s truly something the rest of us aren’t seeing, you all seem like you’re overreacting big time.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:I watched yesterday's video recording, and it was not a pleasant experience. BOE chose to let the CO staff to defend their projection, whereas Wootton parents insisted their data were flawed. So they ended up in stuck, and BOE apparently firmly believed in the former. It's a lost war to me from a spectator's perspective.

That sets up the BOE’s decision as being arbitrary and capricious. Disregarding clear data flaws is the very definition. If the BOE were smart (and honest) it would redo its numbers. But that would mean Wootton can’t move to Crown in the fall of 2027.

The data doesn’t seem flawed. I’ve watched all the presentations even the joint one with planning board. It all seems very defensible and would withstand legal challenge.

A court looks at everything - it’s not obligated to believe anyone.

Uh no.
No, they look at the record before it. And will defer to policy makers when reasoned. Seems reasoned here. I wouldn’t want to be the one wasting money on this suit. MCPS will win despite you not liking it.

Suing because you didn’t get the outcome you wanted is such a waste of money…why won’t they learn that MCPS and the BOE can make these decisions? They choose to give communities a voice…it doesn’t mean they have to agree with what is said.

Lawsuits will turn up corruption. This whole process has been bizarre and there is no logical argument as to why Wootton should close but Magruder remain open. Hold them to the fire and let’s see what turns up.

And then this board will light up complaining about all the money MCPS spent on lawsuits…it’s like a full circle, that we end up causing.

If everything is on the up and up, why is MCPS (and posters on DCUM) afraid of what it might uncover? If there’s such confidence, then the case should get dismissed quickly, so little to no legal expenses. Then again, MCPS blew millions on a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court when if had a very inexpensive alternative it could have taken (but flatly refused, even though it had done it before).

This logic is so faulty. Filing lawsuits because you don’t like something and want to see what if “something sticks.”

Do you welcome any and all lawsuits that anybody could file against you in your personal and professional capacity because you are confident you have done nothing wrong?

Or maybe do you see it as a wasteful drain on time and resources?

Litigation is often the only way for the truth to come out. Maybe MCPS should have thought about the risk of litigation before it cooked up Option H and tried to sneak it past everyone over the holidays? Why do that if it was perfectly legal? Why fear litigation if MCPS is right? Indeed, the case should get dismissed quickly if MCPS is right.

Then again, MCPS thought it was right until the Supreme Court told it that it was dead wrong. Likewise, MCPS broke the rules when it bought EV buses. Seems like MCPS can get important matters very wrong.

People keep trying to make this point that they snuck it in before the holidays and no one had a chance to comment or respond to it. This is demonstrably false. There was a survey, which a lot of people in the Wootton cluster responded to, and there have been public meetings. They can’t make people engage.

Go ahead and tell us what the survey results were. And while you’re at it, what was the community’s response at the public meetings? They didn’t have to make anyone engage - sneaking in Option H in early December guaranteed community response would be delayed until after the 1st of the year. Then a snowstorm hit and meetings were canceled.

So yeah, MCPS gave little time for a response. But when that response came, it was loud and unequivocal but MCPS ignored it anyway.

Just because the opposition is loud, doesn't mean MCPS or the BOE needs to follow it.

MCPS has already incorporated feedback into the process (moving Cold Spring into Churchill, moved Fields Road to Wootton). They've held multiple meetings and took many survey results. There's been a robust debate between all the stakeholders.

This kind of decision isn't decided by whether a school population supports it or not; there's going to be various trade-offs of any decision, even maintaining the status quo.

MCPS and BOE need to make decisions based on the entire county holistically and not let the process to be hijacked by an outspoken minority.

The survey has come out overwhelmingly against the proposal. It has been dismissed as manipulated.

And yet it aligns with the meetings held have been filled with people who vehemently opposed to the proposal.

All because MCPS and BOE obviously decided the outcome on their own, outside the process, because they think they know better.

Subverting the will of the community is unacceptable. It's unacceptable at the national level and it's unacceptable at the local level. This was not done properly, full stop, and the community has shown it is not going to roll over on this. It's time to go back to the drawing board.

I understand, to a point, that Wootton parents are worried about change and it really comes from the concern about your kids and their education. That’s important and feels very personal.

That said, from the outside, this proposal makes sense. You’ll still have a great school and a much better building and the school district can use the brand new building it paid for. Unless there’s truly something the rest of us aren’t seeing, you all seem like you’re overreacting big time.

I am a Wootton parent.

The issue is there is no long term plan for Wootton. Some answer is better than no answer.

First, it was holding school, but Wootton renovations to turn it into a holding school is not on CIP. Magruder is not on CIP. So when will Wootton be turned into holding school and who is going to use it? For how long? What’s the plan afterwards when it is done as a holding school? Does it go back to a permanent school? Does it get demolished and sold? Does MCPS use it for some different use like a central office?

I am not adamantly opposed to this move but I am not on board supporting it because there so many questions that remain unanswered? What won’t Taylor meet with us until 10 days before the vote?

I think there are many people like me who just want the details and have it explained and the process more transparent.

I can be convinced. But mcps and BoE haven’t done the work to convince me. If you want a huge change, give me all the details first at least.

[Anonymous]

They have so much going on now with the two huge boundary studies and all the programming changes they just don’t have the details or the time to explain them. Does it make it feel slap-dash and thrown together? A bit. But I don’t think they have an answer yet to your questions PP. I think they plan to work that out during the next CIP cycle

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I watched yesterday's video recording, and it was not a pleasant experience. BOE chose to let the CO staff to defend their projection, whereas Wootton parents insisted their data were flawed. So they ended up in stuck, and BOE apparently firmly believed in the former. It's a lost war to me from a spectator's perspective.

That sets up the BOE’s decision as being arbitrary and capricious. Disregarding clear data flaws is the very definition. If the BOE were smart (and honest) it would redo its numbers. But that would mean Wootton can’t move to Crown in the fall of 2027.

The data doesn’t seem flawed. I’ve watched all the presentations even the joint one with planning board. It all seems very defensible and would withstand legal challenge.

A court looks at everything - it’s not obligated to believe anyone.

Uh no.
No, they look at the record before it. And will defer to policy makers when reasoned. Seems reasoned here. I wouldn’t want to be the one wasting money on this suit. MCPS will win despite you not liking it.

Suing because you didn’t get the outcome you wanted is such a waste of money…why won’t they learn that MCPS and the BOE can make these decisions? They choose to give communities a voice…it doesn’t mean they have to agree with what is said.

Lawsuits will turn up corruption. This whole process has been bizarre and there is no logical argument as to why Wootton should close but Magruder remain open. Hold them to the fire and let’s see what turns up.

And then this board will light up complaining about all the money MCPS spent on lawsuits…it’s like a full circle, that we end up causing.

If everything is on the up and up, why is MCPS (and posters on DCUM) afraid of what it might uncover? If there’s such confidence, then the case should get dismissed quickly, so little to no legal expenses. Then again, MCPS blew millions on a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court when if had a very inexpensive alternative it could have taken (but flatly refused, even though it had done it before).

This logic is so faulty. Filing lawsuits because you don’t like something and want to see what if “something sticks.”

Do you welcome any and all lawsuits that anybody could file against you in your personal and professional capacity because you are confident you have done nothing wrong?

Or maybe do you see it as a wasteful drain on time and resources?

Litigation is often the only way for the truth to come out. Maybe MCPS should have thought about the risk of litigation before it cooked up Option H and tried to sneak it past everyone over the holidays? Why do that if it was perfectly legal? Why fear litigation if MCPS is right? Indeed, the case should get dismissed quickly if MCPS is right.

Then again, MCPS thought it was right until the Supreme Court told it that it was dead wrong. Likewise, MCPS broke the rules when it bought EV buses. Seems like MCPS can get important matters very wrong.

People keep trying to make this point that they snuck it in before the holidays and no one had a chance to comment or respond to it. This is demonstrably false. There was a survey, which a lot of people in the Wootton cluster responded to, and there have been public meetings. They can’t make people engage.

Go ahead and tell us what the survey results were. And while you’re at it, what was the community’s response at the public meetings? They didn’t have to make anyone engage - sneaking in Option H in early December guaranteed community response would be delayed until after the 1st of the year. Then a snowstorm hit and meetings were canceled.

So yeah, MCPS gave little time for a response. But when that response came, it was loud and unequivocal but MCPS ignored it anyway.

Just because the opposition is loud, doesn't mean MCPS or the BOE needs to follow it.

MCPS has already incorporated feedback into the process (moving Cold Spring into Churchill, moved Fields Road to Wootton). They've held multiple meetings and took many survey results. There's been a robust debate between all the stakeholders.

This kind of decision isn't decided by whether a school population supports it or not; there's going to be various trade-offs of any decision, even maintaining the status quo.

MCPS and BOE need to make decisions based on the entire county holistically and not let the process to be hijacked by an outspoken minority.

The survey has come out overwhelmingly against the proposal. It has been dismissed as manipulated.

And yet it aligns with the meetings held have been filled with people who vehemently opposed to the proposal.

All because MCPS and BOE obviously decided the outcome on their own, outside the process, because they think they know better.

Subverting the will of the community is unacceptable. It's unacceptable at the national level and it's unacceptable at the local level. This was not done properly, full stop, and the community has shown it is not going to roll over on this. It's time to go back to the drawing board.

I understand, to a point, that Wootton parents are worried about change and it really comes from the concern about your kids and their education. That’s important and feels very personal.

That said, from the outside, this proposal makes sense. You’ll still have a great school and a much better building and the school district can use the brand new building it paid for. Unless there’s truly something the rest of us aren’t seeing, you all seem like you’re overreacting big time.

I am a Wootton parent.

The issue is there is no long term plan for Wootton. Some answer is better than no answer.

First, it was holding school, but Wootton renovations to turn it into a holding school is not on CIP. Magruder is not on CIP. So when will Wootton be turned into holding school and who is going to use it? For how long? What’s the plan afterwards when it is done as a holding school? Does it go back to a permanent school? Does it get demolished and sold? Does MCPS use it for some different use like a central office?

I am not adamantly opposed to this move but I am not on board supporting it because there so many questions that remain unanswered? What won’t Taylor meet with us until 10 days before the vote?

I think there are many people like me who just want the details and have it explained and the process more transparent.

I can be convinced. But mcps and BoE haven’t done the work to convince me. If you want a huge change, give me all the details first at least.

That’s my issue as well. It feels very much like you can go to crown for now but what happens in a few years? They’ve already taken out cold spring.

The options in my mind are either Wootton will never ever go back to operating as a high school, but then it just sits empty? It’s just abandoned? At that point, I rather it gets sold and something built than just sitting there being eyesore. (We had the empty giant eyesore for years, I don’t want a repeat). And if this is the case, what happens when there is growth and Crown is overcrowded?

The other option is it goes back to operating as a high school, in which case Wootton will definitely be divided with SM, Dufief, and Travilah staying at Crown and Parkway families moving back with maybe changes like Cold Spring and Horizon Hill coming back? Wayside? Fallsgrove?

Honestly, I am not even opposed to either of the above, I just want to know what the plan is before throwing my support. I am more mad about the fact that there is no plan and this whole process seems rushed. And anytime serious questions are raised, people tell me no there was engagement and you are being selfish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They have so much going on now with the two huge boundary studies and all the programming changes they just don’t have the details or the time to explain them. Does it make it feel slap-dash and thrown together? A bit. But I don’t think they have an answer yet to your questions PP. I think they plan to work that out during the next CIP cycle

They don’t have an answer yet about anything long term, which is exactly why families don’t support it.

Speaking as a Parkway family, this is why I oppose it.

I don’t mind going to Crown with other kids, including new schools. Do I love the fact that I go from extremely walkable to not? No, but I’ll live.

But my biggest problem with this is I feel like I’m being gaslight.

You want me to support a policy that has impacts for decades to come and you can’t even guarantee me that there won’t be an abandoned lot right in front of my house for decades to come? I don’t care what the plan is, just tell me it.

I can list the 5000 reasons why I hate the abandoned giant lot. We just resolved that as a community.

Now you want another one? This time sitting a stone’s throw away from the middle school?

Not having a long term plan is not meaningful community engagement.

[Anonymous]

MCPS either doesn’t have a long term plan (bad) or has one and won’t share it until after the BOE vote and/or next CIP (worse). It looks either incompetent or nefarious. Based on how Option H was offered (over the holidays) with less than 2 months of potential community input, I’m leaning towards the latter. There are too many unanswered questions and MCPS is doing its best to avoid answering them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MCPS either doesn’t have a long term plan (bad) or has one and won’t share it until after the BOE vote and/or next CIP (worse). It looks either incompetent or nefarious. Based on how Option H was offered (over the holidays) with less than 2 months of potential community input, I’m leaning towards the latter. There are too many unanswered questions and MCPS is doing its best to avoid answering them.

Exactly. And in the meantime, parkway families are being called racist elitist etc. for questioning this.

I have NO problem going to school with Fields Road and Rosemont. I mean Christ a few increases in FARMS is a good thing not bad.

I also don’t buy into the fact that academics will suffer. Rising tide lifts all.

I am literally telling and have told MCPS I can be convinced. I can help you convince Parkway families just tell me the long term game plan. What I cannot do is get on board without a long term game plan.

And honestly, if there isn’t a long term game plan, just say that. At least then we can stop pretending like Parkway families have zero justifiable concerns.

[Anonymous]

I mean, they have been pretty clear. They want to move Wootton to the Crown building. That means permanently. I would operate under that assumption.

They want to make the current building a holding school. There is NO PLAN RIGHT NOW to ever turn it back into Wootton.

Could that change if circumstances allow in the future like Woodward? Maybe. But in terms of the situation right now- the answer is that it is not going to become Wootton again.

Maybe there will be another boundary study in 10-15 years in which case everything is back on the drawing board in terms of where current Wootton feeders go. In fact, it's likely, and not only going to impact Wootton feeders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, they have been pretty clear. They want to move Wootton to the Crown building. That means permanently. I would operate under that assumption.

They want to make the current building a holding school. There is NO PLAN RIGHT NOW to ever turn it back into Wootton.

Could that change if circumstances allow in the future like Woodward? Maybe. But in terms of the situation right now- the answer is that it is not going to become Wootton again.

Maybe there will be another boundary study in 10-15 years in which case everything is back on the drawing board in terms of where current Wootton feeders go. In fact, it's likely, and not only going to impact Wootton feeders.

But there is no CIP for Wootton to be turned into a holding school or for Magruder to use it (which is why Magruder is so upset).

Can anyone guarantee that Wootton will be turned into a holding school?