The REAL issue with the proposals to shift boundaries & how MCPS can fix it

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is absurd and a complete straw-man. The real issue, which has been spoken many times, is that people are afraid they will be moved to a lower performing school, not that kids from a lower performing school will be moved to their school. The former will have real economic consequences for many families, split kids from their friends, and simultaneously rob parents of the choice they made for their kids school when they chose to live in a certain area. The later will do none of that, and other than internet trolls I have heard a total of zero actual concerns about moving kids from lower performing schools into higher performing schools. Conversely everyone talks about the later because its much easier to demagogue the issue in terms of racism then it is to criticize parents who don't want to be wiped out financially and want their kids to go to the school they expected when they chose a neighborhood.

The information and maps this application provides are only a guide to MCPS school assignments. The information provided is unofficial. MCPS has made substantial efforts to ensure the accuracy of the information. However school service areas are subject to change. Also school assignments may be unreliable for residents in new subdivisions or residents near a school service area boundary.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/SchoolAssignmentTool2/Index.xhtml

I'm really amazed at the parents who don't understand this. Just because your house was assigned to certain schools when you bought it does not guarantee those will be the same in 5, 10, or 15 years. We certainly considered our neighborhood schools when we bought our house, but I was only pregnant with our first at the time and mainly focused on ES because so much can change by MS/HS. Even then I understood nothing was guaranteed and familiarized myself with the neighboring ESs as well. I wonder how many of these parents who are fretting stretched themselves financially to buy in Potomac and now are concerned about letting a few Rockville/Gaithersberg riffraff coming in and causing a drop in the Great Schools rating from a 10 to a 9.

Once again with the demagoguery - no one is concerned with this, but if you bought a house in Garett Park and stand to lose $200k if you're transferred to Wheaton I'm sure you'd feel differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is absurd and a complete straw-man. The real issue, which has been spoken many times, is that people are afraid they will be moved to a lower performing school, not that kids from a lower performing school will be moved to their school. The former will have real economic consequences for many families, split kids from their friends, and simultaneously rob parents of the choice they made for their kids school when they chose to live in a certain area. The later will do none of that, and other than internet trolls I have heard a total of zero actual concerns about moving kids from lower performing schools into higher performing schools. Conversely everyone talks about the later because its much easier to demagogue the issue in terms of racism then it is to criticize parents who don't want to be wiped out financially and want their kids to go to the school they expected when they chose a neighborhood.

The information and maps this application provides are only a guide to MCPS school assignments. The information provided is unofficial. MCPS has made substantial efforts to ensure the accuracy of the information. However school service areas are subject to change. Also school assignments may be unreliable for residents in new subdivisions or residents near a school service area boundary.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/SchoolAssignmentTool2/Index.xhtml

I'm really amazed at the parents who don't understand this. Just because your house was assigned to certain schools when you bought it does not guarantee those will be the same in 5, 10, or 15 years. We certainly considered our neighborhood schools when we bought our house, but I was only pregnant with our first at the time and mainly focused on ES because so much can change by MS/HS. Even then I understood nothing was guaranteed and familiarized myself with the neighboring ESs as well. I wonder how many of these parents who are fretting stretched themselves financially to buy in Potomac and now are concerned about letting a few Rockville/Gaithersberg riffraff coming in and causing a drop in the Great Schools rating from a 10 to a 9.

Once again with the demagoguery - no one is concerned with this, but if you bought a house in Garett Park and stand to lose $200k if you're transferred to Wheaton I'm sure you'd feel differently.

DP. Wait the kids from Garrett Park are being transferred to Wheaton? Sh-t. We were thinking of buying there. Where is it safe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone knows this; however these boundaries have not changed for decades in some instances. Its not unreasonable for parents to rely upon them when choosing a school for their child. Nor it is unreasonable for them to fight when someone tries to take that choice away, especially if it means losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

The argument here is that, if you paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (!) extra so that your house would be zoned for School A vs. School B in MCPS, your house must continue to be zoned for School A, because otherwise you might lose money when you sell your house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This is absurd and a complete straw-man. The real issue, which has been spoken many times, is that people are afraid they will be moved to a lower performing school, not that kids from a lower performing school will be moved to their school. The former will have real economic consequences for many families, split kids from their friends, and simultaneously rob parents of the choice they made for their kids school when they chose to live in a certain area. The later will do none of that, and other than internet trolls I have heard a total of zero actual concerns about moving kids from lower performing schools into higher performing schools. Conversely everyone talks about the later because its much easier to demagogue the issue in terms of racism then it is to criticize parents who don't want to be wiped out financially and want their kids to go to the school they expected when they chose a neighborhood.

The information and maps this application provides are only a guide to MCPS school assignments. The information provided is unofficial. MCPS has made substantial efforts to ensure the accuracy of the information. However school service areas are subject to change. Also school assignments may be unreliable for residents in new subdivisions or residents near a school service area boundary.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/SchoolAssignmentTool2/Index.xhtml

I'm really amazed at the parents who don't understand this. Just because your house was assigned to certain schools when you bought it does not guarantee those will be the same in 5, 10, or 15 years. We certainly considered our neighborhood schools when we bought our house, but I was only pregnant with our first at the time and mainly focused on ES because so much can change by MS/HS. Even then I understood nothing was guaranteed and familiarized myself with the neighboring ESs as well. I wonder how many of these parents who are fretting stretched themselves financially to buy in Potomac and now are concerned about letting a few Rockville/Gaithersberg riffraff coming in and causing a drop in the Great Schools rating from a 10 to a 9.

Once again with the demagoguery - no one is concerned with this, but if you bought a house in Garett Park and stand to lose $200k if you're transferred to Wheaton I'm sure you'd feel differently.

So now you're losing $200k? Again people are fretting about hypothetical scenarios that HAVE NOT EVEN BEEN PROPOSED.

Whenever you are buying a home you are taking a risk- as I'm sure many who bought at the height of the bubble can attest to. You don't like it, then rent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone knows this; however these boundaries have not changed for decades in some instances. Its not unreasonable for parents to rely upon them when choosing a school for their child. Nor it is unreasonable for them to fight when someone tries to take that choice away, especially if it means losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

The argument here is that, if you paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (!) extra so that your house would be zoned for School A vs. School B in MCPS, your house must continue to be zoned for School A, because otherwise you might lose money when you sell your house.

It is not "MUST". But it is something people can care about and can fight for.
Just like some other people claim that they care about the welfare of low income groups - it is not a MUST either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Once again with the demagoguery - no one is concerned with this, but if you bought a house in Garett Park and stand to lose $200k if you're transferred to Wheaton I'm sure you'd feel differently.

So now you're losing $200k? Again people are fretting about hypothetical scenarios that HAVE NOT EVEN BEEN PROPOSED.

Whenever you are buying a home you are taking a risk- as I'm sure many who bought at the height of the bubble can attest to. You don't like it, then rent.

There are certainly other ways to do it. E.g., you don't like it (the proposed change), then go out and oppose it, to make it not happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone knows this; however these boundaries have not changed for decades in some instances. Its not unreasonable for parents to rely upon them when choosing a school for their child. Nor it is unreasonable for them to fight when someone tries to take that choice away, especially if it means losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

The argument here is that, if you paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (!) extra so that your house would be zoned for School A vs. School B in MCPS, your house must continue to be zoned for School A, because otherwise you might lose money when you sell your house.

No the argument is that homeowners have a reasonable expectation of stability when a school is a major, if not the greatest determinate factor when choosing a house. Anything else destabilizes the market, causes real financial pain and robs people of their choices. All for some pie-in-the-sky theory that sending my kid to your school will make that school better. I mean I'm flattered that you think my kid will help (she must have some innate quality that the students there don't have), but I doubt that she will solve systematic poverty and lack of parental education. However, what is not in question is that property values will drop in the affected area. The market may be irrational, but it does what it does and real people will lose real money here. Then in 10 years when all the high SES people migrate to the still (or newly) high performing school clusters and the SJW's begin screaming again, we'll have to do it all over... Wouldn't it be just easier to fix the actual problems rather than acquiesce to the unreasonable demands of some teenagers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone knows this; however these boundaries have not changed for decades in some instances. Its not unreasonable for parents to rely upon them when choosing a school for their child. Nor it is unreasonable for them to fight when someone tries to take that choice away, especially if it means losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

The argument here is that, if you paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (!) extra so that your house would be zoned for School A vs. School B in MCPS, your house must continue to be zoned for School A, because otherwise you might lose money when you sell your house.

No the argument is that homeowners have a reasonable expectation of stability when a school is a major, if not the greatest determinate factor when choosing a house. Anything else destabilizes the market, causes real financial pain and robs people of their choices. All for some pie-in-the-sky theory that sending my kid to your school will make that school better. I mean I'm flattered that you think my kid will help (she must have some innate quality that the students there don't have), but I doubt that she will solve systematic poverty and lack of parental education. However, what is not in question is that property values will drop in the affected area. The market may be irrational, but it does what it does and real people will lose real money here. Then in 10 years when all the high SES people migrate to the still (or newly) high performing school clusters and the SJW's begin screaming again, we'll have to do it all over... Wouldn't it be just easier to fix the actual problems rather than acquiesce to the unreasonable demands of some teenagers?

I hope you are showing up at the meetings and making your voice heard. Voices like yours are needed to bring some sanity to the studies. Small adjustments to balance enrollments? Ok. But no bussing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

Because it’s her college app fodder. Get some more press and tweets going! More victim culture!

Let's just say she'll never experience the consequences of the policies for which she is advocating. She'll move from one bubble to the next, collecting accolades for being woke while other students suffer the consequences of her resume-building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Why should parents who worked hard so their UMC kids could attend Churchill have to listen to Tadikonda tell them where their kids should go to school. She's in the IB magnet at Richard Montgomery, and not exactly mixing it up every day with kids from Springbrook or Paint Branch.

Because she's a member of the Board of Education.

If you don't like it, you go and run for a seat on the Board of Education.

Because it’s her college app fodder. Get some more press and tweets going! More victim culture!

Let's just say she'll never experience the consequences of the policies for which she is advocating. She'll move from one bubble to the next, collecting accolades for being woke while other students suffer the consequences of her resume-building.

You seem really threatened by a teenage girl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Let's just say she'll never experience the consequences of the policies for which she is advocating. She'll move from one bubble to the next, collecting accolades for being woke while other students suffer the consequences of her resume-building.

There's some courage! Anonymously criticizing a high school senior whom you know nothing about!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No the argument is that homeowners have a reasonable expectation of stability when a school is a major, if not the greatest determinate factor when choosing a house. Anything else destabilizes the market, causes real financial pain and robs people of their choices. All for some pie-in-the-sky theory that sending my kid to your school will make that school better. I mean I'm flattered that you think my kid will help (she must have some innate quality that the students there don't have), but I doubt that she will solve systematic poverty and lack of parental education. However, what is not in question is that property values will drop in the affected area. The market may be irrational, but it does what it does and real people will lose real money here. Then in 10 years when all the high SES people migrate to the still (or newly) high performing school clusters and the SJW's begin screaming again, we'll have to do it all over... Wouldn't it be just easier to fix the actual problems rather than acquiesce to the unreasonable demands of some teenagers?

And they've got it! You live in Montgomery County, the expectation is an MCPS school.

Otherwise the argument is that we must maintain a harmful distortion in the housing market because some people might lose money if we don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone knows this; however these boundaries have not changed for decades in some instances. Its not unreasonable for parents to rely upon them when choosing a school for their child. Nor it is unreasonable for them to fight when someone tries to take that choice away, especially if it means losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

The argument here is that, if you paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (!) extra so that your house would be zoned for School A vs. School B in MCPS, your house must continue to be zoned for School A, because otherwise you might lose money when you sell your house.

It is not "MUST". But it is something people can care about and can fight for.
Just like some other people claim that they care about the welfare of low income groups - it is not a MUST either.

And in fact people are doing this. The discussion is going like this:

Kids: We are for diverse schools!
Some parents: But our property values!

It's not a good look, when you get out or your bubble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No the argument is that homeowners have a reasonable expectation of stability when a school is a major, if not the greatest determinate factor when choosing a house. Anything else destabilizes the market, causes real financial pain and robs people of their choices. All for some pie-in-the-sky theory that sending my kid to your school will make that school better. I mean I'm flattered that you think my kid will help (she must have some innate quality that the students there don't have), but I doubt that she will solve systematic poverty and lack of parental education. However, what is not in question is that property values will drop in the affected area. The market may be irrational, but it does what it does and real people will lose real money here. Then in 10 years when all the high SES people migrate to the still (or newly) high performing school clusters and the SJW's begin screaming again, we'll have to do it all over... Wouldn't it be just easier to fix the actual problems rather than acquiesce to the unreasonable demands of some teenagers?

And they've got it! You live in Montgomery County, the expectation is an MCPS school.

Otherwise the argument is that we must maintain a harmful distortion in the housing market because some people might lose money if we don't.

There's no "harmful" distortion. People with means will always filter to the best schools - just the way it is. The only distortion is trying to carve some of them off against their will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone knows this; however these boundaries have not changed for decades in some instances. Its not unreasonable for parents to rely upon them when choosing a school for their child. Nor it is unreasonable for them to fight when someone tries to take that choice away, especially if it means losing hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

The argument here is that, if you paid hundreds of thousands of dollars (!) extra so that your house would be zoned for School A vs. School B in MCPS, your house must continue to be zoned for School A, because otherwise you might lose money when you sell your house.

It is not "MUST". But it is something people can care about and can fight for.
Just like some other people claim that they care about the welfare of low income groups - it is not a MUST either.

And in fact people are doing this. The discussion is going like this:

Kids: We are for diverse schools!
Some parents: But our property values!

It's not a good look, when you get out or your bubble.

Yup. You'd be better of focusing on the argument of not wanting your kid having to sit an hour on the bus to get to school. Because whining about property values is just inspiring these kids even more.