Superintendent's Recommendation for Richard Montgomery ES #5 Boundaries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 that's pretty short sighted to say it's not a disruption. "Their boundary is already screwy just screw with them some more, they won't notice." Good luck maintaining low FARMs at the new school with that attitude. Who would want to buy in RP5 if they have options that don't involve being bussed past multiple schools?

I think solution should start with figuring out the best place for RP5. Some one else pointed out that RP5 is closer to CG or Beall. Without moving RP5 , RP is left with 7% FARMs. That means moving RP5. TB is even further so Beall and CG are two choices. I am not familiar with roads in that area. Some one can point out if Beall is closer or CG is closer.

RP is left with low FARMS because their closest neighborhoods do not have FARMS as they are all single family colonials. RP1 and RP4 have no FARMS. RP3 has maybe 3% from MPDU from Park Potomac. RP5 has about 5% from MPDU in Fallsgrove. Like another poster mentioned, there was no FARMS in Ritchie Park similar to Fallsmeade, Cold Spring for decades. Then Beall moved RP2 and RP6 into Ritchie Park in the late 90's due to low enrollment. Even then it was only 9%. FARMS has increased to 20% due to MPDU being built and Fireside turning low income housing units. About 13% FARMS comes from RP 2 and 6 total. So why the need to move everyone everywhere? It seems no one wants RP to have proximity and lower FARM. So instead they bus all over and disrupt every school. Won't it cost more? Won't the busses be late going to schools? I just don't get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Out of all the options I've seen, I thought the Hungerford proposal would have made a lot of sense, not sure why it wasn't used for this proposal, the only change that

B5 and B6 both want to go to Beall and they opposed it saying that boy scout and girls scout are together. They used CG3 argument here.

B5, B6 and CG3 wants to remain at old school at any cost even if it means keeping older school over capacity.

It wasn't a strong opposition though, was it? The only arguments to it we're people who wants to stay in the same school like the ones tou said. But capacity and SES wise, this option would actually work, might need soime tweaks for RP's very low FARMS but that was about it.

Yes, the Hungerford proposal makes the most sense of all the crazy options that are on the table at this point. It's not perfect, but no option is, and it's much closer to perfect than many of the others. If more people can get behind this option, it will save a lot of children from being bussed all over the cluster...

How about 3rd option presented today? It doesn't change current boundary by much. It's not busing kids all over. It's balancing FARMs. It's leaving Twinbrook for title 1. It's balancing capacity.

Only downside will be extra few minutes of bus rides for RP5 kids. Still an option with most benefits and one negative.

Also that one RP neighborhood that will drive by the new school on their way to Ritchie Park...

Yes, I forgot about it. Also entire RP2 is not really walk able. We heard RP representative saying that on behalf of few RP2 parents in working session. If it's true then RP2 may need a bus to go to either RM#5 or RP. Right now they go to RP already.

Anyway, as I said earlier - Not possible to come up with a perfect solution. But option 3 presented today looks the best solution to me. CG3 may still object, but B5 and B6 are able to avoid moving. Main downside is still few minutes extra bus ride for RP5 kids. They are most easy to move due to already being an island.

Why not send Horizon Hill to RM ES #5? They are closer to the new school. Then the concern about distance/commute time is moot for both neighborhoods (Fallsgrove and Horizon Hill).

Horizon Hill is right across the street from Ritchie Park. I can walk thru Hadley's park right to the school. We are closer than half the RP1 kids but because of Falls Rd we are technically not walkers. That doesn't mean we should get bussed all over. RP2, RP6, and RP3 are all closer to RM5 and Twinbrook. RP5 is so far away from everyone. It amazes me our neighborhood even got brought into this mess last minute because a few people didn't like the FARMS rates?

The fact RP2 and RP6 are now not even moving to the new school when they are the closest and sending Fallsgrove to RM5 and potentially us to Twinbrook is ridiculous. Why aren't we sending CG4 or CG5 to Twinbrook or anywhere else? Why is far off neighborhoods of RP now getting all the changes?

Because HH has only 50 elementary school kids, and the BOE decided to pick on HH and give up on 50 votes in favor of some others. VOTE THEM OUT. I live in HH. I didn't vote for these clowns.

I don't believe that the BoE actually wants that option. They requested the option to prove a point. Save your outrage for if/when Horizon Hill ACTUALLY gets sent to Twinbrook or another far-away school.

Why would you wait to show outrage until after they decide? By then it is too late.

[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:Out of all the options I've seen, I thought the Hungerford proposal would have made a lot of sense, not sure why it wasn't used for this proposal, the only change that

B5 and B6 both want to go to Beall and they opposed it saying that boy scout and girls scout are together. They used CG3 argument here.

B5, B6 and CG3 wants to remain at old school at any cost even if it means keeping older school over capacity.

It wasn't a strong opposition though, was it? The only arguments to it we're people who wants to stay in the same school like the ones tou said. But capacity and SES wise, this option would actually work, might need soime tweaks for RP's very low FARMS but that was about it.

Yes, the Hungerford proposal makes the most sense of all the crazy options that are on the table at this point. It's not perfect, but no option is, and it's much closer to perfect than many of the others. If more people can get behind this option, it will save a lot of children from being bussed all over the cluster...

How about 3rd option presented today? It doesn't change current boundary by much. It's not busing kids all over. It's balancing FARMs. It's leaving Twinbrook for title 1. It's balancing capacity.

Only downside will be extra few minutes of bus rides for RP5 kids. Still an option with most benefits and one negative.

Also that one RP neighborhood that will drive by the new school on their way to Ritchie Park...

Yes, I forgot about it. Also entire RP2 is not really walk able. We heard RP representative saying that on behalf of few RP2 parents in working session. If it's true then RP2 may need a bus to go to either RM#5 or RP. Right now they go to RP already.

Anyway, as I said earlier - Not possible to come up with a perfect solution. But option 3 presented today looks the best solution to me. CG3 may still object, but B5 and B6 are able to avoid moving. Main downside is still few minutes extra bus ride for RP5 kids. They are most easy to move due to already being an island.

Why not send Horizon Hill to RM ES #5? They are closer to the new school. Then the concern about distance/commute time is moot for both neighborhoods (Fallsgrove and Horizon Hill).

Horizon Hill is right across the street from Ritchie Park. I can walk thru Hadley's park right to the school. We are closer than half the RP1 kids but because of Falls Rd we are technically not walkers. That doesn't mean we should get bussed all over. RP2, RP6, and RP3 are all closer to RM5 and Twinbrook. RP5 is so far away from everyone. It amazes me our neighborhood even got brought into this mess last minute because a few people didn't like the FARMS rates?

The fact RP2 and RP6 are now not even moving to the new school when they are the closest and sending Fallsgrove to RM5 and potentially us to Twinbrook is ridiculous. Why aren't we sending CG4 or CG5 to Twinbrook or anywhere else? Why is far off neighborhoods of RP now getting all the changes?

Because HH has only 50 elementary school kids, and the BOE decided to pick on HH and give up on 50 votes in favor of some others. VOTE THEM OUT. I live in HH. I didn't vote for these clowns.

I don't believe that the BoE actually wants that option. They requested the option to prove a point. Save your outrage for if/when Horizon Hill ACTUALLY gets sent to Twinbrook or another far-away school.

Why would you wait to show outrage until after they decide? By then it is too late.

The outrage about voting them out of office. By all means, advocate for the boundary option that you support now!

[Anonymous]

I don't think anyone wants to keep them in office.

Between the time changes bring K students home at 4:30pm, calendar issues, whining to state about summer days, wanting snow waivers without doing anything, and now incorrect enrollments prolonging a terrible situation?

Yes, they sick!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone wants to keep them in office.

Between the time changes bring K students home at 4:30pm, calendar issues, whining to state about summer days, wanting snow waivers without doing anything, and now incorrect enrollments prolonging a terrible situation?

Yes, they sick!

You realize the incorrect FARMS data came from MCPS, not the BoE, right???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 that's pretty short sighted to say it's not a disruption. "Their boundary is already screwy just screw with them some more, they won't notice." Good luck maintaining low FARMs at the new school with that attitude. Who would want to buy in RP5 if they have options that don't involve being bussed past multiple schools?

I think solution should start with figuring out the best place for RP5. Some one else pointed out that RP5 is closer to CG or Beall. Without moving RP5 , RP is left with 7% FARMs. That means moving RP5. TB is even further so Beall and CG are two choices. I am not familiar with roads in that area. Some one can point out if Beall is closer or CG is closer.

RP is left with low FARMS because their closest neighborhoods do not have FARMS as they are all single family colonials. RP1 and RP4 have no FARMS. RP3 has maybe 3% from MPDU from Park Potomac. RP5 has about 5% from MPDU in Fallsgrove. Like another poster mentioned, there was no FARMS in Ritchie Park similar to Fallsmeade, Cold Spring for decades. Then Beall moved RP2 and RP6 into Ritchie Park in the late 90's due to low enrollment. Even then it was only 9%. FARMS has increased to 20% due to MPDU being built and Fireside turning low income housing units. About 13% FARMS comes from RP 2 and 6 total. So why the need to move everyone everywhere? It seems no one wants RP to have proximity and lower FARM. So instead they bus all over and disrupt every school. Won't it cost more? Won't the busses be late going to schools? I just don't get it.

This is the reason why the Hungerford proposal is less disruptive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Out of all the options I've seen, I thought the Hungerford proposal would have made a lot of sense, not sure why it wasn't used for this proposal, the only change that

B5 and B6 both want to go to Beall and they opposed it saying that boy scout and girls scout are together. They used CG3 argument here.

B5, B6 and CG3 wants to remain at old school at any cost even if it means keeping older school over capacity.

It wasn't a strong opposition though, was it? The only arguments to it we're people who wants to stay in the same school like the ones tou said. But capacity and SES wise, this option would actually work, might need soime tweaks for RP's very low FARMS but that was about it.

Yes, the Hungerford proposal makes the most sense of all the crazy options that are on the table at this point. It's not perfect, but no option is, and it's much closer to perfect than many of the others. If more people can get behind this option, it will save a lot of children from being bussed all over the cluster...

How about 3rd option presented today? It doesn't change current boundary by much. It's not busing kids all over. It's balancing FARMs. It's leaving Twinbrook for title 1. It's balancing capacity.

Only downside will be extra few minutes of bus rides for RP5 kids. Still an option with most benefits and one negative.

Also that one RP neighborhood that will drive by the new school on their way to Ritchie Park...

Yes, I forgot about it. Also entire RP2 is not really walk able. We heard RP representative saying that on behalf of few RP2 parents in working session. If it's true then RP2 may need a bus to go to either RM#5 or RP. Right now they go to RP already.

Anyway, as I said earlier - Not possible to come up with a perfect solution. But option 3 presented today looks the best solution to me. CG3 may still object, but B5 and B6 are able to avoid moving. Main downside is still few minutes extra bus ride for RP5 kids. They are most easy to move due to already being an island.

Option 3 seems to be the best out of the ones shown today, but I still think the Hungerford option is better, since it's less disruptive. They could have adopted this and then transfer some TB to RP to balance SES, that's less far fetched than bussing TB all they way to CG.

If I understand correctly, TB doesn't want to change due to various reasons. I do understand that entire school has like 70% population below 40K income. Many of them don't own car and it's not possible for them to drive if they miss bus.

So if you leave TB then RP has two sections. RP2 and RP5 with different SES level. To balance FARMs, it's much easier to let RP2 continue going to RP, no disruption for them.

Only disruption will be RP5 changing school to go to RM#5. Since RP5 is already an island, it's not really a disruption for RP5, but it's a longer bus ride.

I do see today's option 3 as the least disruptive option for everyone. It does have issues, but it's a least disruptive option and does a job to balance FARMs.

That's just like saying "since CG2 is already an island, it's not really a disruption for CG2, but it's a longer bus ride" A longer bus ride for a kindergartener is a disruption. A longer bus ride is a disruption for any families wanting to be involved in school activities. We all see bussing RP4 to Twinbrook or T5 to College Gardens as absurd due to the distance and the challenges it causes. Why don't people seem to care about RP5 going to RM ES #5 in terms of the distance and challenges for those families?

You are right here. RP5 should be moved to Beall or CG. That will make commute shorter for RP5 kids. Then move other region downwards to fill RM#5. I may even draft something if enough people want that. That's a good way to balance bus ride and FARMs rate.

I did mention that in previous meeting. I am in RP5, but many parents said that they would want to go to RM#5 if they have to change school.

CG would be over capacity if RP5 was moved there. Other CG zones (besides Chinese and CG3) would need to be moved to make space for RP5.

[Anonymous]

I see people mentioning the hungerford proposal? Which proposal is that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see people mentioning the hungerford proposal? Which proposal is that?

I’m not sure but I think it may be the BOE Alt #2 where they broke some Beall zones in half?

I’m all for that one because it keeps the town square area at Beall which makes sense to me as I can walk there from my B1 zone house.

[Anonymous]

Anyone else think this superintendent also needs to go?

[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:Out of all the options I've seen, I thought the Hungerford proposal would have made a lot of sense, not sure why it wasn't used for this proposal, the only change that

B5 and B6 both want to go to Beall and they opposed it saying that boy scout and girls scout are together. They used CG3 argument here.

B5, B6 and CG3 wants to remain at old school at any cost even if it means keeping older school over capacity.

It wasn't a strong opposition though, was it? The only arguments to it we're people who wants to stay in the same school like the ones tou said. But capacity and SES wise, this option would actually work, might need soime tweaks for RP's very low FARMS but that was about it.

Yes, the Hungerford proposal makes the most sense of all the crazy options that are on the table at this point. It's not perfect, but no option is, and it's much closer to perfect than many of the others. If more people can get behind this option, it will save a lot of children from being bussed all over the cluster...

How about 3rd option presented today? It doesn't change current boundary by much. It's not busing kids all over. It's balancing FARMs. It's leaving Twinbrook for title 1. It's balancing capacity.

Only downside will be extra few minutes of bus rides for RP5 kids. Still an option with most benefits and one negative.

Also that one RP neighborhood that will drive by the new school on their way to Ritchie Park...

Yes, I forgot about it. Also entire RP2 is not really walk able. We heard RP representative saying that on behalf of few RP2 parents in working session. If it's true then RP2 may need a bus to go to either RM#5 or RP. Right now they go to RP already.

Anyway, as I said earlier - Not possible to come up with a perfect solution. But option 3 presented today looks the best solution to me. CG3 may still object, but B5 and B6 are able to avoid moving. Main downside is still few minutes extra bus ride for RP5 kids. They are most easy to move due to already being an island.

Option 3 seems to be the best out of the ones shown today, but I still think the Hungerford option is better, since it's less disruptive. They could have adopted this and then transfer some TB to RP to balance SES, that's less far fetched than bussing TB all they way to CG.

If I understand correctly, TB doesn't want to change due to various reasons. I do understand that entire school has like 70% population below 40K income. Many of them don't own car and it's not possible for them to drive if they miss bus.

So if you leave TB then RP has two sections. RP2 and RP5 with different SES level. To balance FARMs, it's much easier to let RP2 continue going to RP, no disruption for them.

Only disruption will be RP5 changing school to go to RM#5. Since RP5 is already an island, it's not really a disruption for RP5, but it's a longer bus ride.

I do see today's option 3 as the least disruptive option for everyone. It does have issues, but it's a least disruptive option and does a job to balance FARMs.

That's just like saying "since CG2 is already an island, it's not really a disruption for CG2, but it's a longer bus ride" A longer bus ride for a kindergartener is a disruption. A longer bus ride is a disruption for any families wanting to be involved in school activities. We all see bussing RP4 to Twinbrook or T5 to College Gardens as absurd due to the distance and the challenges it causes. Why don't people seem to care about RP5 going to RM ES #5 in terms of the distance and challenges for those families?

You are right here. RP5 should be moved to Beall or CG. That will make commute shorter for RP5 kids. Then move other region downwards to fill RM#5. I may even draft something if enough people want that. That's a good way to balance bus ride and FARMs rate.

I did mention that in previous meeting. I am in RP5, but many parents said that they would want to go to RM#5 if they have to change school.

CG would be over capacity if RP5 was moved there. Other CG zones (besides Chinese and CG3) would need to be moved to make space for RP5.

Well at this point, why not? If they are willing to bus a section of TB to CG and another to RP. Send RP families to 3 schools, all further and past other schools - why not CG? They are literally getting the easiest transitions in every single option. They pull CI (no neighborhood or bus issues) and CG3 goes to Beall which is right down the street. Why not move Fallsgrove to CG and send King Farm to RM5?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see people mentioning the hungerford proposal? Which proposal is that?

I’m not sure but I think it may be the BOE Alt #2 where they broke some Beall zones in half?

I’m all for that one because it keeps the town square area at Beall which makes sense to me as I can walk there from my B1 zone house.

This is the BOE option presented in the first week, Alt #2 is Hungerford's proposal. RP might need to take some FARMS to be a bit more balance but that's about it. Maybe take a portion of RP2 or RP6?

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/RMES5_BOEAdoptedAlternatives11092017.pdf

This is the most recent recommendation:
http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/RMES5_RecSuppA111317.pdf

This is what the Superintendent said on the 2nd and third paragraph of his recent recommendation. Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that we have 6 recommendations from the 2 links above.

On November 2, 2017, the Board of Education approved three alternative
boundary assignments for consideration. The Board also adopted a resolution regarding
the socioeconomic diversity of the cluster assignments.
Boundary reassignments are challenging and require disruption to existing patterns and practices.
The Richard Montgomery Elementary School #5 boundary reassignment process has further been
complicated by changing conditions in recent stages of the process. As a result of three particular
events, we have distributed updated and corrected enrollment and demographic information
and have reconvened the Boundary Advisory Committee to discuss and provide feedback
on the updated information. In addition, I am submitting subsequent recommendations
for the Board’s review and consideration, pursuant to the Board’s November 2, 2017, resolution.
Members of the Board of Education 2 November 14, 2017
The following three events resulted in a need to provide updated boundary options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think anyone wants to keep them in office.

Between the time changes bring K students home at 4:30pm, calendar issues, whining to state about summer days, wanting snow waivers without doing anything, and now incorrect enrollments prolonging a terrible situation?

Yes, they sick!

You realize the incorrect FARMS data came from MCPS, not the BoE, right???

So what? They could have then made the then easy decision to vote on Hungerford - THE END.

Instead they make MORE options and besides #2, they are worse and disruptive. They could have ended this it calmly

[Anonymous]

The BOE wants equity so Dr. smith delivered on equity with his new recommendation:http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/RMES5_RecSuppA111317.pdf . Now the most disrruptive option is ranked as No. 1 choice. I have thought he is a guy with common sense but I guess when your job is in danger, you obey the order from the board because they can dismiss you anytime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The BOE wants equity so Dr. smith delivered on equity with his new recommendation:http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/RMES5_RecSuppA111317.pdf . Now the most disrruptive option is ranked as No. 1 choice. I have thought he is a guy with common sense but I guess when your job is in danger, you obey the order from the board because they can dismiss you anytime.

It's not the number 1 choice. In his memorandum Dr. Smith made very clear that he was presenting options without ranking them in order. Reading comprehension.