Forest Knolls/Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest boundary study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superintendent's recommendation is up: http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SupplementB.pdf

That is a really confusing document regarding the MS issue because it says the recommendation is for MS articulation to “remain the same” for FKES and PCES. So does that mean that the kids moving from FKES to PCES will articulate with Pine Crest as a whole (be re-assigned for MS too) or that the current assignments will be maintained? And what about high school? If I lived in the zones to be moved I’d be totally confused.

I don't think it's confusing. This is the text:
"With respect to the middle school reassignment, my recommendation is to maintain the current middle school assignments for Forest Knolls, Montgomery Knolls, and Pine Crest elementary schools."

The current middle school assignments are:
Forest Knolls-->SSIMS
Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest-->Eastern

So those will not change.

The students in F3 and F4 will be rezoned from Forest Knolls to Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest for elementary school. No other rezoning will occur. Simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superintendent's recommendation is up: http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SupplementB.pdf

That is a really confusing document regarding the MS issue because it says the recommendation is for MS articulation to “remain the same” for FKES and PCES. So does that mean that the kids moving from FKES to PCES will articulate with Pine Crest as a whole (be re-assigned for MS too) or that the current assignments will be maintained? And what about high school? If I lived in the zones to be moved I’d be totally confused.

HS was never part of this study, so those zones are remaining the same (for now). Good question about the MS issue, but since he didn't select any of the MS options, I think whichever MS you're zoned for now remains the same.

Right, but he phrased it as MS assignments will "stay the same for Forest Knolls, Montgomery Knolls, and Pine Crest" - but are the FK3 and FK4 zones "Forest Knolls" or "Pine Crest"? If the recommendation is adopted, they will go to Pine Crest and if the Pine Crest MS assignment "stays the same" then those kids from FK3 and FK4 who go to Pine Crest should go to Eastern? Or, did he mean that the MS assignments will stay the same as they are now, creating a new MKES-PCES-SSIMS-Northwood zone? It's just a very confusing way of putting it in the report.

Agreed. The map is a little hard to read but if I understand it correctly, I believe that all of the neighborhoods currently zoned for Forest Knolls will still go to SSIMS and Northwood—just as they were before. Which is a shame In my opinion because it means some kids who became friends in Kindergarten through 5th grade will branch off into different middle schools and high schools and those friendships will sort of evaporate. I don’t like split articulation.

All of the options had split articulation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superintendent's recommendation is up: http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SupplementB.pdf

Right, but he phrased it as MS assignments will "stay the same for Forest Knolls, Montgomery Knolls, and Pine Crest" - but are the FK3 and FK4 zones "Forest Knolls" or "Pine Crest"? If the recommendation is adopted, they will go to Pine Crest and if the Pine Crest MS assignment "stays the same" then those kids from FK3 and FK4 who go to Pine Crest should go to Eastern? Or, did he mean that the MS assignments will stay the same as they are now, creating a new MKES-PCES-SSIMS-Northwood zone? It's just a very confusing way of putting it in the report.

Yes, that is exactly what it means. Which was one of the two possibilities all along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superintendent's recommendation is up: http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SupplementB.pdf

That is a really confusing document regarding the MS issue because it says the recommendation is for MS articulation to “remain the same” for FKES and PCES. So does that mean that the kids moving from FKES to PCES will articulate with Pine Crest as a whole (be re-assigned for MS too) or that the current assignments will be maintained? And what about high school? If I lived in the zones to be moved I’d be totally confused.

I don't think it's confusing. This is the text:
"With respect to the middle school reassignment, my recommendation is to maintain the current middle school assignments for Forest Knolls, Montgomery Knolls, and Pine Crest elementary schools."

The current middle school assignments are:
Forest Knolls-->SSIMS
Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest-->Eastern

So those will not change.

The students in F3 and F4 will be rezoned from Forest Knolls to Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest for elementary school. No other rezoning will occur. Simple.

I understand that interpretation, but to me, if the current MS assignments stay the same, then the Pine Crest middle school assignment IS changing. Because the F3 and F4 kids will be MK/PC kids, not FK kids. So the MS assignment for PC is changing from Easter to split articulation to Eastern/SSIMS. But I do think you are probably right about what the recommendation is. I just think it's written poorly and so it's not entirely clear that is the intended meaning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superintendent's recommendation is up: http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SupplementB.pdf

That is a really confusing document regarding the MS issue because it says the recommendation is for MS articulation to “remain the same” for FKES and PCES. So does that mean that the kids moving from FKES to PCES will articulate with Pine Crest as a whole (be re-assigned for MS too) or that the current assignments will be maintained? And what about high school? If I lived in the zones to be moved I’d be totally confused.

I don't think it's confusing. This is the text:
"With respect to the middle school reassignment, my recommendation is to maintain the current middle school assignments for Forest Knolls, Montgomery Knolls, and Pine Crest elementary schools."

The current middle school assignments are:
Forest Knolls-->SSIMS
Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest-->Eastern

So those will not change.

The students in F3 and F4 will be rezoned from Forest Knolls to Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest for elementary school. No other rezoning will occur. Simple.

I understand that interpretation, but to me, if the current MS assignments stay the same, then the Pine Crest middle school assignment IS changing. Because the F3 and F4 kids will be MK/PC kids, not FK kids. So the MS assignment for PC is changing from Easter to split articulation to Eastern/SSIMS. But I do think you are probably right about what the recommendation is. I just think it's written poorly and so it's not entirely clear that is the intended meaning.

This new map makes it clearer. You can see the SSIMS areas have a different fill pattern than the Eastern areas.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SuperintendentsRecommendationZoomed.pdf

[Anonymous]

It's explained by this chart too:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Superintendent's recommendation is up: http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SupplementB.pdf

That is a really confusing document regarding the MS issue because it says the recommendation is for MS articulation to “remain the same” for FKES and PCES. So does that mean that the kids moving from FKES to PCES will articulate with Pine Crest as a whole (be re-assigned for MS too) or that the current assignments will be maintained? And what about high school? If I lived in the zones to be moved I’d be totally confused.

I don't think it's confusing. This is the text:
"With respect to the middle school reassignment, my recommendation is to maintain the current middle school assignments for Forest Knolls, Montgomery Knolls, and Pine Crest elementary schools."

The current middle school assignments are:
Forest Knolls-->SSIMS
Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest-->Eastern

So those will not change.

The students in F3 and F4 will be rezoned from Forest Knolls to Montgomery Knolls/Pine Crest for elementary school. No other rezoning will occur. Simple.

I understand that interpretation, but to me, if the current MS assignments stay the same, then the Pine Crest middle school assignment IS changing. Because the F3 and F4 kids will be MK/PC kids, not FK kids. So the MS assignment for PC is changing from Easter to split articulation to Eastern/SSIMS. But I do think you are probably right about what the recommendation is. I just think it's written poorly and so it's not entirely clear that is the intended meaning.

This new map makes it clearer. You can see the SSIMS areas have a different fill pattern than the Eastern areas.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/Knolls_SuperintendentsRecommendationZoomed.pdf

I agree that map makes it very clear. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Population growth is crazy all over. It’s not limited to MCPS, school districts in the DMV are grappling with schools being built,new housing being built and families moving into the schools. Soon after the schools are then bursting at the seems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Population growth is crazy all over. It’s not limited to MCPS, school districts in the DMV are grappling with schools being built,new housing being built and families moving into the schools. Soon after the schools are then bursting at the seems.

In the case of these schools it wasn't new growth as most of the housing was built in the 1940's and 1950's but a generational shift where older families move out and younger families moved in. Woodmoor used to be primarily Catholic and sent most of the kids to St Bernadette's Catholic school which is why Pinecrest used to be underutilized and had the split with Montgomery Knolls

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The board has scheduled the boundary study hearing for Thurs., Nov. 7th at 6:00 pm.

Reminder that this public hearing is tonight. Is anyone planning to go and present any objections to the recommendation? And if so, what will you be arguing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The board has scheduled the boundary study hearing for Thurs., Nov. 7th at 6:00 pm.

Reminder that this public hearing is tonight. Is anyone planning to go and present any objections to the recommendation? And if so, what will you be arguing?

Didn't you have to pre-register to present testimony at the hearing? In any case, I don't see a lot of room to object. The Superintendent basically went with the simplest option provided to him (move the closest two zones over the MK/PC). There wasn't a ton of wiggle room here. I also think that, considering the contentiousness surrounding the other boundary study going on, the Board is going to want an easy decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The board has scheduled the boundary study hearing for Thurs., Nov. 7th at 6:00 pm.

Reminder that this public hearing is tonight. Is anyone planning to go and present any objections to the recommendation? And if so, what will you be arguing?

Didn't you have to pre-register to present testimony at the hearing? In any case, I don't see a lot of room to object. The Superintendent basically went with the simplest option provided to him (move the closest two zones over the MK/PC). There wasn't a ton of wiggle room here. I also think that, considering the contentiousness surrounding the other boundary study going on, the Board is going to want an easy decision.

I agree. At the board meeting the other day, Pat O'Neill mentioned receiving a letter from the Northwood-Four Corners civic association, but she didn't have it with her and didn't describe what it said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The board has scheduled the boundary study hearing for Thurs., Nov. 7th at 6:00 pm.

Reminder that this public hearing is tonight. Is anyone planning to go and present any objections to the recommendation? And if so, what will you be arguing?

Didn't you have to pre-register to present testimony at the hearing? In any case, I don't see a lot of room to object. The Superintendent basically went with the simplest option provided to him (move the closest two zones over the MK/PC). There wasn't a ton of wiggle room here. I also think that, considering the contentiousness surrounding the other boundary study going on, the Board is going to want an easy decision.

I agree. At the board meeting the other day, Pat O'Neill mentioned receiving a letter from the Northwood-Four Corners civic association, but she didn't have it with her and didn't describe what it said.

There was hardly any testimony about Forest Knolls at the hearing. Two people suggested that all current FK students get grandfathered in, so reassignments would start with only next year's kindergarteners going to Montgomery Knolls. Judy Docca was the only board member who asked a follow-up question about that. Seems unlikely to go anywhere, given the investments they've made in the two additions at MK/PC.

[Anonymous]

The superintendent's recommendation was approved unanimously tonight.

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/BJ6T9T764242/$file/Supp%20B%20Forest%20Knolls%20Mont%20Knolls%20Pine%20Crest%20ES%20191126.pdf

[Anonymous]

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/boundary-changes-for-silver-spring-elementary-schools-adopted/