Initial boundary options for Crown/Damascus study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Option 4 is all around the best option.

Option 4 is by far the worst. Too many weird split articulations and feed patterns. Every school splits and feed here and there. It’s a logistic nightmare. Can people have some common sense?

All of the options are like that. Option 3 is the worst. Very strange maps for both MS and HS in option 3.

Option 4 is definitely the best.

No, look again. Option 2 and 4 create 20-30 new split articulations while 1 and 3 don’t .

[Anonymous]

Dufief and Travilah should go to QO.

Everyone keeps talking about neighborhood schools and proximity.

Go to QO and stop complaining. It’s going to be ok. You kids will do fine.

You, as the parent should support your kids and the will succumb and do well. Move on!

These petitions are stupid. The rationale makes no sense. They were poorly written.

[Anonymous]

^. succeed

[Anonymous]

Why are they moving Wayside to Wootton and not moving Ritchie Park to Wootton? Fallsgrove, Orchard Ridge, Horizon Hill, and Potomac Woods are all walkable to the high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Wootton petition people are wasting your time. There is zero chance that Wootton and QO are not getting shuffled around. There will be major changes to Wootton and QO.

+1 I don't know about major, but yes, Wootton boundary will change.

The thing is, Wootton is not overcrowded and is not projected to be overcrowded in the future. There was no reason to include Wootton in the Crown study in the first place, other than to target them for FARMS and DEI goals. Churchill could have been included in the other boundary study for Woodward to address their supposed overcrowding problem and Wootton left out of both studies. A lot of the Asian community in the Wootton district (not including me since I'm not Asian, but many in my neighborhood are) feel like the Board of Education is targeting them unfairly, and I can't really say I blame them. I agree with them that it's BS that Wootton was included in any of the boundary studies to begin with. The Board could accomplish all their goals without changing anything about the Wootton cluster, so it makes sense for the Wootton community to push back as much as possible on any boundary changes for Wootton. Will it work, maybe not, but they have to try, and being fatalistic about the result just guarantees their voices won't be heard.

Wootton is not overcrowded because their community always yells loudest to keep their school from becoming overcrowded and then other schools get overcrowded instead: see Fallsgrove being zoned for RM due to concerns about overcrowding even though its walking distance to Wootton and all thr Fallsgrove kids get busses to RM instead. Wootton is included because all neighboring clusters need to be included. Wootton continues to be undercapacity due to this exclusionary mindset and the fact that BoE has historically given in to their loud voices.

This could not be further from the truth. Ritchie park ES is zoned for RM to balance RM diversity. One part is actually split off Wootton to achieve this agenda.

Okay but again why is Fallsgrove zoned for Ritchie Park and not Lakewood? Fallsgrove kids could also walk to Lakewood. It is 100% about overcrowding concerns at Wootton as was mentioned by Mayor Krasnow at the City of Rockville council meeting in 2000 where they recommended placing Fallsgrove at RM due to overcrowding concerns at Wootton. That is the concern written in the meeting minites which you can read yourself:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.rockvillemd.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/2868%3FMOBILE%3DON&ved=2ahUKEwj7r9y-1OGNAxVgRDABHVDCGPoQFnoECCcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw12Ih0sbKw42iu9zQV_4MJ8

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Wootton petition people are wasting your time. There is zero chance that Wootton and QO are not getting shuffled around. There will be major changes to Wootton and QO.

+1 I don't know about major, but yes, Wootton boundary will change.

The thing is, Wootton is not overcrowded and is not projected to be overcrowded in the future. There was no reason to include Wootton in the Crown study in the first place, other than to target them for FARMS and DEI goals. Churchill could have been included in the other boundary study for Woodward to address their supposed overcrowding problem and Wootton left out of both studies. A lot of the Asian community in the Wootton district (not including me since I'm not Asian, but many in my neighborhood are) feel like the Board of Education is targeting them unfairly, and I can't really say I blame them. I agree with them that it's BS that Wootton was included in any of the boundary studies to begin with. The Board could accomplish all their goals without changing anything about the Wootton cluster, so it makes sense for the Wootton community to push back as much as possible on any boundary changes for Wootton. Will it work, maybe not, but they have to try, and being fatalistic about the result just guarantees their voices won't be heard.

Wootton is not overcrowded because their community always yells loudest to keep their school from becoming overcrowded and then other schools get overcrowded instead: see Fallsgrove being zoned for RM due to concerns about overcrowding even though its walking distance to Wootton and all thr Fallsgrove kids get busses to RM instead. Wootton is included because all neighboring clusters need to be included. Wootton continues to be undercapacity due to this exclusionary mindset and the fact that BoE has historically given in to their loud voices.

This could not be further from the truth. Ritchie park ES is zoned for RM to balance RM diversity. One part is actually split off Wootton to achieve this agenda.

Okay but again why is Fallsgrove zoned for Ritchie Park and not Lakewood? Fallsgrove kids could also walk to Lakewood. It is 100% about overcrowding concerns at Wootton as was mentioned by Mayor Krasnow at the City of Rockville council meeting in 2000 where they recommended placing Fallsgrove at RM due to overcrowding concerns at Wootton. That is the concern written in the meeting minites which you can read yourself:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.rockvillemd.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/2868%3FMOBILE%3DON&ved=2ahUKEwj7r9y-1OGNAxVgRDABHVDCGPoQFnoECCcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw12Ih0sbKw42iu9zQV_4MJ8

You think Lakewood has space to take fallsgrove? It’s half of an elementary school. Lakewood is a very established old neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Late to this thread and haven’t had a chance to read all 58 pages, but I wanted to add my thoughts. After all the budget cuts over the past two years, if walkers are not made a priority, it would be a major contradiction. Prioritizing walkers would help reduce transportation costs, ease traffic congestion—especially on narrow and back roads—and address the ongoing bus driver shortage. This should absolutely be the top priority.

[Anonymous]

Cannot agree more

Anonymous wrote:Late to this thread and haven’t had a chance to read all 58 pages, but I wanted to add my thoughts. After all the budget cuts over the past two years, if walkers are not made a priority, it would be a major contradiction. Prioritizing walkers would help reduce transportation costs, ease traffic congestion—especially on narrow and back roads—and address the ongoing bus driver shortage. This should absolutely be the top priority.

[Anonymous]

OMG. I just sat down and started looking at the options. It's clear to me that MCPS didn't listen at all to parental feedback (prioritizing walkers, reducing traffic, eliminate split articulation, keep continuity of ES/MS/HS, etc.). HOW DO WE FIRE THESE PEOPLE!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those concerned about or otherwise interested in the various changes being proposed to the Wootton cluster, I thought it would be helpful to have the various Change petitions compiled in one place. I've put together a list of the ones I've seen, but please add any I've missed. They seem to share the general theme of minimizing changes to Wootton, though I think the different petitions raise pretty different concerns and issues.

1) Keep Wootton together: https://www.change.org/p/urge-to-preserve-the-integrity-of-wootton-high-school-in-the-crown-boundary-process

2) Don't move Wayside ES to Wootton: https://www.change.org/p/wayside-hoover-churchill-community-on-boundary-study-strong-opposition-to-reassignment

3) Don't move a small Lakewood ES neighborhood away from Wootton: https://www.change.org/p/don-t-divide-lakewood-keep-all-our-community-together-in-wootton

4) Don't move Dufief ES away from Wootton: https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-harmful-boundary-changes-keep-dufief-with-frost-and-wootton

There are a stone mill one and a new travillah one as well

https://chng.it/6YGjCQhp

https://chng.it/Gz4qsrPS9K

Thanks! Updated list below. To the Wayside parents who don't want to move - supporting the families who want to stay at Wootton could help your cause. And similarly for the Wootton parents who want to stay at Wootton - supporting the Wayside families that don't want to move to Wootton could help your cause.

1) Keep Wootton together: https://www.change.org/p/urge-to-preserve-the-integrity-of-wootton-high-school-in-the-crown-boundary-process

2) Don't move Wayside ES to Wootton: https://www.change.org/p/wayside-hoover-churchill-community-on-boundary-study-strong-opposition-to-reassignment

3) Don't move a small Lakewood ES neighborhood away from Wootton: https://www.change.org/p/don-t-divide-lakewood-keep-all-our-community-together-in-wootton

4) Don't move Dufief ES away from Wootton: https://www.change.org/p/say-no-to-harmful-boundary-changes-keep-dufief-with-frost-and-wootton

5) Don't move Stone Mill ES away from Wootton: https://chng.it/6YGjCQhp

6) Don't move Travilah ES away from Wootton: https://chng.it/Gz4qsrPS9K

Some of these petitions made into out office in NIH. It's awkward when co workers are asking to sign them. i don't live in these cluster and have no idea about anything. BOE should thow away all these petions. It's pretty much noise.

You're lying. If you "don't live in these cluster and have no idea about anything", why are you on this post? Are you just randomly reading everything on DCUMS? Or (more likely) are you one of the MCPS employees responsible for boundary changes trying to throw shade on parent petitions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Late to this thread and haven’t had a chance to read all 58 pages, but I wanted to add my thoughts. After all the budget cuts over the past two years, if walkers are not made a priority, it would be a major contradiction. Prioritizing walkers would help reduce transportation costs, ease traffic congestion—especially on narrow and back roads—and address the ongoing bus driver shortage. This should absolutely be the top priority.

They need to make a better assessment on walker zone before they prioritize walkers. Right now the options include many unreasonable areas which are actually not walkable. All it does it to take away bus from these neighborhoods and parents have to drive individually which cause more traffic congestion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You Wootton petition people are wasting your time. There is zero chance that Wootton and QO are not getting shuffled around. There will be major changes to Wootton and QO.

+1 I don't know about major, but yes, Wootton boundary will change.

The thing is, Wootton is not overcrowded and is not projected to be overcrowded in the future. There was no reason to include Wootton in the Crown study in the first place, other than to target them for FARMS and DEI goals. Churchill could have been included in the other boundary study for Woodward to address their supposed overcrowding problem and Wootton left out of both studies. A lot of the Asian community in the Wootton district (not including me since I'm not Asian, but many in my neighborhood are) feel like the Board of Education is targeting them unfairly, and I can't really say I blame them. I agree with them that it's BS that Wootton was included in any of the boundary studies to begin with. The Board could accomplish all their goals without changing anything about the Wootton cluster, so it makes sense for the Wootton community to push back as much as possible on any boundary changes for Wootton. Will it work, maybe not, but they have to try, and being fatalistic about the result just guarantees their voices won't be heard.

Wootton is not overcrowded because their community always yells loudest to keep their school from becoming overcrowded and then other schools get overcrowded instead: see Fallsgrove being zoned for RM due to concerns about overcrowding even though its walking distance to Wootton and all thr Fallsgrove kids get busses to RM instead. Wootton is included because all neighboring clusters need to be included. Wootton continues to be undercapacity due to this exclusionary mindset and the fact that BoE has historically given in to their loud voices.

This could not be further from the truth. Ritchie park ES is zoned for RM to balance RM diversity. One part is actually split off Wootton to achieve this agenda.

Okay but again why is Fallsgrove zoned for Ritchie Park and not Lakewood? Fallsgrove kids could also walk to Lakewood. It is 100% about overcrowding concerns at Wootton as was mentioned by Mayor Krasnow at the City of Rockville council meeting in 2000 where they recommended placing Fallsgrove at RM due to overcrowding concerns at Wootton. That is the concern written in the meeting minites which you can read yourself:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.rockvillemd.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/2868%3FMOBILE%3DON&ved=2ahUKEwj7r9y-1OGNAxVgRDABHVDCGPoQFnoECCcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw12Ih0sbKw42iu9zQV_4MJ8

You think Lakewood has space to take fallsgrove? It’s half of an elementary school. Lakewood is a very established old neighborhood.

If boundaries are moved around to prioritize walkers, yes it does. I went to Lakewood in kindergarten in the 80s and then boundaries changed for me for 1st grade and I went to Fallsmead the rest of kindergarten Rockshire neighborhood-by Giant - surprise boundaries can change at Lakewood and they arent that old. And there are newer neighborhoods that go into Lakewwod too. Boundaries are not and should not be static and if there are walkable neighborhoods to schools they should be prioritized to minimize bus necessity and increase geographic proximity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this thread and haven’t had a chance to read all 58 pages, but I wanted to add my thoughts. After all the budget cuts over the past two years, if walkers are not made a priority, it would be a major contradiction. Prioritizing walkers would help reduce transportation costs, ease traffic congestion—especially on narrow and back roads—and address the ongoing bus driver shortage. This should absolutely be the top priority.

They need to make a better assessment on walker zone before they prioritize walkers. Right now the options include many unreasonable areas which are actually not walkable. All it does it to take away bus from these neighborhoods and parents have to drive individually which cause more traffic congestion.

This is actually a real issue. I'm currently in a 'walk zone' for our MS and HS. For MS I, and most people in my neighborhood, were unwilling to let MS students walk because it meant walking along the shoulder of a busy road in which people regularly swerved over to the shoulder to avoid left-turning cars. In HS, we mostly view our kids as able to walk along that route, but the HS is much further so few make their kids do it on cold/rainy days. So in the end, we're all creating huge traffic congestion every morning.

I'd love my kids to walk, but at the very least they need to work with the county to prioritize installation of sidewalks on some reasonable path to the schools they deem to be in the 'walking zone.'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Late to this thread and haven’t had a chance to read all 58 pages, but I wanted to add my thoughts. After all the budget cuts over the past two years, if walkers are not made a priority, it would be a major contradiction. Prioritizing walkers would help reduce transportation costs, ease traffic congestion—especially on narrow and back roads—and address the ongoing bus driver shortage. This should absolutely be the top priority.

They need to make a better assessment on walker zone before they prioritize walkers. Right now the options include many unreasonable areas which are actually not walkable. All it does it to take away bus from these neighborhoods and parents have to drive individually which cause more traffic congestion.

This is actually a real issue. I'm currently in a 'walk zone' for our MS and HS. For MS I, and most people in my neighborhood, were unwilling to let MS students walk because it meant walking along the shoulder of a busy road in which people regularly swerved over to the shoulder to avoid left-turning cars. In HS, we mostly view our kids as able to walk along that route, but the HS is much further so few make their kids do it on cold/rainy days. So in the end, we're all creating huge traffic congestion every morning.

I'd love my kids to walk, but at the very least they need to work with the county to prioritize installation of sidewalks on some reasonable path to the schools they deem to be in the 'walking zone.'

They also need to think about reasonable walk time. In my opinion, 20 min walk is fine but 45 min is too much. Nobody is gonna make kids walk 45 min each way to school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are they moving Wayside to Wootton and not moving Ritchie Park to Wootton? Fallsgrove, Orchard Ridge, Horizon Hill, and Potomac Woods are all walkable to the high school.

Because RPES provides the upper SES to RM, particularly if FG moves out.

If you look at the maps, it shows RPES is NOT a walk zone, but FG is. Yes, I know HH is actually walkable to Wootton (I live here, and I know HH used to be a walkable neighborhood to Wootton) but MCPS hasn't identified HH as such, but they did identify FG as a walk zone to Crown.