Forum Index
»
Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Seneca Valley Boundary Study
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
Anyone can sue about anything. But anybody who pays a lawyer to sue on grounds that the BoE made a decision that was not solely based on geography, when it's explicitly set out that geography is only 1 of 4 factors, is throwing money down a hole. https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/policy/pdf/faa.pdf |
Anonymous
What would be illegal here? As residents of Montgomery County, they're entitled to public schools somewhere within the county, and if that happens to be far from their home, they're entitled to school bus rides there and back. The elected BOE members can set the boundaries however they choose. Still don't think that option is going to be selected, but there's really nothing to "lawyer up" about. |
Anonymous
DP. Yes the 4 factors must be considered but the solution has to solve the problem. Let's look at the objective of this initiative. It's not to even out demographics. |
Anonymous
| Option 4 looks best to me overall. The distances busses would need to travel is very manageable. |
Anonymous
Clearly. |
Anonymous
Demographics, like geography, is one of the four factors. |
Anonymous
They can set the boundaries however they choose, as long as they're not arbitrary or capricious. Which they're not, as long as they follow the process. |
Anonymous
| I'm actually surprised at the restraint shown here. Unless #4 happens it won't be a huge change. I would've assumed they would have tried to "balance demographics" the way they did with BCC MS#2 initially. |
Anonymous
Option #4 is strictly demographics, and at the first meeting they stated that there would be one option for each criteria and then a few options combining criteria. Option #4 simply stated “How can I get the best demographic makeup using the schools in the study, and still see some overcrowding relief”. So, Little Bennett and Darnestown. It’s important to note that this option also leaves many open seats at SVHS, even after 5 years. Meanwhile, Clarksburg would still have a large overcrowding issue to solve and NWHS would address their issues with an already approved HS to be built in Crown Farm. |
Anonymous
+100. Option 4 is the worst solution for CHS. Let's not forget the actual problem. |
Anonymous
|
This is from the Student Assignment in Elementary and Secondary Schools & Title VI policy at Ed.gov (https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/tviassgn.html):
Assignment to School School districts may not segregate students on the basis of race, color, or national origin in assigning students to schools. In some areas, the population distribution of a school district enrolling large numbers of minority and nonminority students may result in schools with substantially disproportionate enrollments of students of one race. Although school districts must ensure that students are not assigned on the basis of race, color, or national origin, the law does not require that each school within a district have a racially balanced student population. Do you guys think this policy makes it illegal for MCPS to use demographics as a criteria for deciding school boundaries? |
Anonymous
4 is not a huge change in terms of demographics. It's a change for the people who would be rezoned from Northwest to Seneca Valley, but that goes for all of the other people who would be rezoned in any of the options too, by definition. It's 5-6 miles from Darnestown ES to Northwest HS, compared to 7 miles from Darnestown ES to Seneca Valley HS. That's also not a huge change. |
Anonymous
Not true which is why bussing is illegal. |
Anonymous
If they were using it to segregate schools, then yes. But since MCPS is using it to desegregate schools, then no. |