Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone see the BOE work session today? I missed it. Any developments? Still looking like H?

It's still going on.

Is this online? Is there a link to watch?

It's done now. Here's the recording:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well there you have it... Dr. T was asked pointedly about the FAKE "Rockville Recommendation" (aka Option G) during the Jawando Education Budget Forum tonight and if he was reconsidering it for his recommendation and he said "absolutely not". It's giving... I appreciate the offer but I'm just not interested.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Taylor is never going to pursue Option G. The only chance it has is if the board itself takes the side of those who are arguing for it.

One of the big hurdles with Rockville’s argument is that it suggests Crown be filled/opened as a full school upon inauguration of a new Wootton building on Wootton parkway. If done that way, it would leave the county with no holding school for subsequent high schools which need renovation after Magruder/Wootton. So the superintendent won’t be too thrilled about that.

Wrong. The hurdle is money. Lack of.

Two things happened contributing to Wootton closure:
1. Building crown with the money to renovate Wootton.
2. Regional programs which take away the operational cost for crown as 27th high school.

Wootton is the one being hurt here. But the resentment toward W schools is making people lose perspective and react irrationally.

Correct. But they are hiding behind fiscal responsibility to excuse their prejudice. It’s yet another example of selective scrutiny (or criticism). They turn a blind eye towards the EV buses shenanigans because they’re pro-green energy (I.e., the ends justify the means).

Most recently on the Wootton closure, they’re turning a blind eye to the enrollment projection data used to justify building Crown, as well as to support Option H. Here’s the problem for them. If the BOE votes to adopt Option H in the face of serious questions about the underlying data, then it’s setting itself up for a smack down by the MD State BOE and/or an court injunction. The smart move for the BOE would be to hold a hearing, calling for experts from both sides, which would demonstrate appropriate due diligence. But this would mean a delay in transplanting Wootton to Crown for the 2027-2028 school year and force MCPS to either fill it with Gaithersburg kids or use it primarily as a holding school. Either way, Option H will be dead or delayed for a few years at least. A delay in Option H and using Crown as a holding school for a few years wouldn’t be a bad outcome for right now, especially since there is precedent with how MCPS used the new Woodward building. It would also give everyone time to cool off.

Except a lot of us think that Wootton isn't being hurt and that this is much ado about nothing. Not to mention that we are irritated by their tactics and the wails of lamentation coming from the City and County Councils. If only they had cared this much about educational quality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s clear the naysayers on this thread are likely residents of Crown or its environs whose kids don’t or wouldn’t go to Wootton where it is today. They’re excited about opening a new school (built for someone else) and calling it Wootton (a lie) to boost their property values and improve the Gaithersburg tax base.

The fact that Wootton families are almost universally opposed to closing Wootton and transplanting some of its students to Crown should speak volumes to the BOE. Unfortunately, political deals have been cut to cover up MCPS’ incompetence and reward Gaithersburg with a “W” school (which used to have a well-performing school in QO, but no longer). I guess it’s equity at work once again.

I'm a naysayer who lives elsewhere in the County. Your arguments are not convincing, and frankly, off-putting. (As if your property values aren't on you mind.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What really *should* have happened if so many Wootton parents weren't so hellbent on getting a brand new school on the current Wootton site AND keeping their entire cluster together (totally unrealistic when it is a boundary study intended to redraw boundaries of multiple schools) is the following:

- Crown HS - populated with DuFief, Stone Mill, Travilah, Rosemont, and Fields Road, (with Fallsmead Rio island going to Crown)

- Wootton (at current location) - Fallsmead (without Rio island), Lakewood, Cold Spring, and Ritchie Park

- RM - Twinbrook, Beall, Bayard Rustin, and College Gardens

This scenario would help to alleviate the overcrowding at RM, focus on geographic proximity for filling Crown while keeping 3 of the Wootton cluster schools together at both current Wootton and Crown, and maximize walkers/minimize buses at Wootton. Right now 100% of Ritchie Park kids are bussed to RM, but at least 60% could walk to Wootton.

I know Ritchie Park wanted to stay at JW and RM, but again, that is nonsensical from a boundary study perspective as well - at least one school in the RM cluster should/should have been moved to fulfill the original plan/promise to alleviate RM overcrowding and Ritchie Park makes the most sense from a geographic, minimizing buses perspective.

But you are ignoring FARMS in your scenario (or maybe you aren't because you would be at your dream Wootton).

[Anonymous]

One change of note from the meeting is that the county is considering some alternate options for middle schools. For the Wootton move to Crown Farm, one of the alternates is to place Stone Mill and Travilah together at Cabin John and retain Potomac at Hoover, keeping Cabin John as a split-articulation school and Hoover as single-matriculation to Churchill. They say they did not suggest this initially because it would make boundaries non-contiguous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What really *should* have happened if so many Wootton parents weren't so hellbent on getting a brand new school on the current Wootton site AND keeping their entire cluster together (totally unrealistic when it is a boundary study intended to redraw boundaries of multiple schools) is the following:

- Crown HS - populated with DuFief, Stone Mill, Travilah, Rosemont, and Fields Road, (with Fallsmead Rio island going to Crown)

- Wootton (at current location) - Fallsmead (without Rio island), Lakewood, Cold Spring, and Ritchie Park

- RM - Twinbrook, Beall, Bayard Rustin, and College Gardens

This scenario would help to alleviate the overcrowding at RM, focus on geographic proximity for filling Crown while keeping 3 of the Wootton cluster schools together at both current Wootton and Crown, and maximize walkers/minimize buses at Wootton. Right now 100% of Ritchie Park kids are bussed to RM, but at least 60% could walk to Wootton.

I know Ritchie Park wanted to stay at JW and RM, but again, that is nonsensical from a boundary study perspective as well - at least one school in the RM cluster should/should have been moved to fulfill the original plan/promise to alleviate RM overcrowding and Ritchie Park makes the most sense from a geographic, minimizing buses perspective.

But you are ignoring FARMS in your scenario (or maybe you aren't because you would be at your dream Wootton).

DP. I don't know what you're trying to accomplish. FARMS is not controlled by the school. It's controlled by the parents.

In my opinion, the best way MCPS can help FARMS students is to intercept them early in Elementary School. Provide the academic basics. Provide hope. And, in my opinion, institute a program that any top student (as evidenced by standardized test scores, FARMS or not) may be granted the right to COSA to any other under-capacity school of their choice in MCPS as a reward. This incentivizes learning and achievement.

My guess is that wouldn't make you happy if an academically competitive environment was created? My guess is you really don't care about FARMS kids? Am I right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone see the BOE work session today? I missed it. Any developments? Still looking like H?

It's still going on.

Is this online? Is there a link to watch?

It's done now. Here's the recording:

Over 3 hours, anyone can give highlights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What really *should* have happened if so many Wootton parents weren't so hellbent on getting a brand new school on the current Wootton site AND keeping their entire cluster together (totally unrealistic when it is a boundary study intended to redraw boundaries of multiple schools) is the following:

- Crown HS - populated with DuFief, Stone Mill, Travilah, Rosemont, and Fields Road, (with Fallsmead Rio island going to Crown)

- Wootton (at current location) - Fallsmead (without Rio island), Lakewood, Cold Spring, and Ritchie Park

- RM - Twinbrook, Beall, Bayard Rustin, and College Gardens

This scenario would help to alleviate the overcrowding at RM, focus on geographic proximity for filling Crown while keeping 3 of the Wootton cluster schools together at both current Wootton and Crown, and maximize walkers/minimize buses at Wootton. Right now 100% of Ritchie Park kids are bussed to RM, but at least 60% could walk to Wootton.

I know Ritchie Park wanted to stay at JW and RM, but again, that is nonsensical from a boundary study perspective as well - at least one school in the RM cluster should/should have been moved to fulfill the original plan/promise to alleviate RM overcrowding and Ritchie Park makes the most sense from a geographic, minimizing buses perspective.

But you are ignoring FARMS in your scenario (or maybe you aren't because you would be at your dream Wootton).

DP. I don't know what you're trying to accomplish. FARMS is not controlled by the school. It's controlled by the parents.

In my opinion, the best way MCPS can help FARMS students is to intercept them early in Elementary School. Provide the academic basics. Provide hope. And, in my opinion, institute a program that any top student (as evidenced by standardized test scores, FARMS or not) may be granted the right to COSA to any other under-capacity school of their choice in MCPS as a reward. This incentivizes learning and achievement.

My guess is that wouldn't make you happy if an academically competitive environment was created? My guess is you really don't care about FARMS kids? Am I right?

Moving kids out of schools doesn’t work. Providing more to those schools would be a better solution. Many of our kids are at high farms schools and the lack of course offerings is a problem, especially because some of the smarter kids go to other schools leaving others with little.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone see the BOE work session today? I missed it. Any developments? Still looking like H?

It's still going on.

Is this online? Is there a link to watch?

It's done now. Here's the recording:

Over 3 hours, anyone can give highlights?

You can bet on Wootton going to Crown. Wootton will finally be saved

[Anonymous]

looks like option h is gonna pass based on that meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s clear the naysayers on this thread are likely residents of Crown or its environs whose kids don’t or wouldn’t go to Wootton where it is today. They’re excited about opening a new school (built for someone else) and calling it Wootton (a lie) to boost their property values and improve the Gaithersburg tax base.

The fact that Wootton families are almost universally opposed to closing Wootton and transplanting some of its students to Crown should speak volumes to the BOE. Unfortunately, political deals have been cut to cover up MCPS’ incompetence and reward Gaithersburg with a “W” school (which used to have a well-performing school in QO, but no longer). I guess it’s equity at work once again.

I'm a naysayer who lives elsewhere in the County. Your arguments are not convincing, and frankly, off-putting. (As if your property values aren't on you mind.)

How do YOU want to fund the school system? Will you double your property taxes? Step up now to help.

[Anonymous]

Buckle up folks. If the recommendation passes, there will 100% be lawsuits. So have fun wasting taxpayers money!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Buckle up folks. If the recommendation passes, there will 100% be lawsuits. So have fun wasting taxpayers money!

Which would be the ultimate Whiny Wootton move—you worked SO HARD and still didn’t get what you wanted so now you want to punish everyone else by wasting even more money. Yea—-no good will towards you will come from a lawsuit. Drop it, man. Sucks but move right along.

[Anonymous]

I 100% support a lawsuit and would contribute to funds for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I 100% support a lawsuit and would contribute to funds for it.

Sincere question: Do you care about the legal basis for that suit and sincerely believe that a law has been violated? Or do you sincerely want the Wootton site to stay open as is and are invested enough to fight for that by any means available?

To be clear- I have no objection to either. That is how our legal system is designed. 8’m just curious.