Concerned about buying in WJ cluster because of re-zoning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

Your numbers are more powerful than denigrating the consultants and staff. Just FYI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

Your numbers are more powerful than denigrating the consultants and staff. Just FYI.

DP

If you were at the zoom sessions yesterday you'd be angry at the consultants and staff too. I found their approach of basically just reading the same statements over 4 times and not even allowing questions to be pretty offensive and disrespectful. Huge waste of time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

Your numbers are more powerful than denigrating the consultants and staff. Just FYI.

DP

If you were at the zoom sessions yesterday you'd be angry at the consultants and staff too. I found their approach of basically just reading the same statements over 4 times and not even allowing questions to be pretty offensive and disrespectful. Huge waste of time.

I was there. Not angry, I believe they said there would be office hours soon where you can ask questions. There are also the in person sessions.

Patience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

Your numbers are more powerful than denigrating the consultants and staff. Just FYI.

DP

If you were at the zoom sessions yesterday you'd be angry at the consultants and staff too. I found their approach of basically just reading the same statements over 4 times and not even allowing questions to be pretty offensive and disrespectful. Huge waste of time.

I was there. Not angry, I believe they said there would be office hours soon where you can ask questions. There are also the in person sessions.

Patience.

It's bizarre to do a one-way webinar, not take any questions, and call it "engagement". If you're going to do that just record it and let people watch at their convenience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

Your numbers are more powerful than denigrating the consultants and staff. Just FYI.

DP

If you were at the zoom sessions yesterday you'd be angry at the consultants and staff too. I found their approach of basically just reading the same statements over 4 times and not even allowing questions to be pretty offensive and disrespectful. Huge waste of time.

I was there. Not angry, I believe they said there would be office hours soon where you can ask questions. There are also the in person sessions.

Patience.

It's bizarre to do a one-way webinar, not take any questions, and call it "engagement". If you're going to do that just record it and let people watch at their convenience.

They said (I think) that they would do office hours later. Maybe they even gave dates for that. If they opened up for questions, they never would have gotten through the material they had. This is a multi step process and there is another survey you can complete.

I don’t think it’s fair to criticize them at this point for not engaging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

Great job. Proximity matters. We don’t need more socially engineered schools. Access to Excellence should be the goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

Great job. Proximity matters. We don’t need more socially engineered schools. Access to Excellence should be the goal.

Since, WJ and Woodward is less than a mle apart, prximity won't be an issue for any kind of conbinations. It;s extremely poor job in this sitution. When schools are far apart then proximity plays a big part, not here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

+1

Concentrating proverty in one school when both are right next to each other is just absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

+1

Concentrating proverty in one school when both are right next to each other is just absurd.

LOL, you must be new here. Concentrating poverty is basically MoCo's approach to everything. It's why all the apartment buildings with huge numbers of affordable units and the homeless shelters get built in Silver Spring instead of neighboring Bethesda.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

+1

Concentrating proverty in one school when both are right next to each other is just absurd.

LOL, you must be new here. Concentrating poverty is basically MoCo's approach to everything. It's why all the apartment buildings with huge numbers of affordable units and the homeless shelters get built in Silver Spring instead of neighboring Bethesda.

Yes, I am new to this area. Bethesda and Silver Spring at least have some distance, but yes no reason to not spread low income housing in Bethesda. Putting all poverty in one area or one school is net negative for society.

Here I find it very puzzling. Woodward and WJ are less than a mile from each other on the same road. It's just insane to make two schools so different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

+1

Concentrating proverty in one school when both are right next to each other is just absurd.

LOL, you must be new here. Concentrating poverty is basically MoCo's approach to everything. It's why all the apartment buildings with huge numbers of affordable units and the homeless shelters get built in Silver Spring instead of neighboring Bethesda.

Yes, I am new to this area. Bethesda and Silver Spring at least have some distance, but yes no reason to not spread low income housing in Bethesda. Putting all poverty in one area or one school is net negative for society.

Here I find it very puzzling. Woodward and WJ are less than a mile from each other on the same road. It's just insane to make two schools so different.

There's not "no reason." There's a cost to building anything, and Bethesda land is very valuable. It doesn't make economic sense to put a lot of subsidized units there. If you want to increase values elsewhere, build more infrastructure (and make sure to invest in safety) to make those areas as appealing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

+1

Concentrating proverty in one school when both are right next to each other is just absurd.

LOL, you must be new here. Concentrating poverty is basically MoCo's approach to everything. It's why all the apartment buildings with huge numbers of affordable units and the homeless shelters get built in Silver Spring instead of neighboring Bethesda.

Yes, I am new to this area. Bethesda and Silver Spring at least have some distance, but yes no reason to not spread low income housing in Bethesda. Putting all poverty in one area or one school is net negative for society.

Here I find it very puzzling. Woodward and WJ are less than a mile from each other on the same road. It's just insane to make two schools so different.

There's not "no reason." There's a cost to building anything, and Bethesda land is very valuable. It doesn't make economic sense to put a lot of subsidized units there. If you want to increase values elsewhere, build more infrastructure (and make sure to invest in safety) to make those areas as appealing.

Another reason is that MoCo doesn't want to upset the wealthiest part of its tax base. The simple truth is that wealthy people like to be surrounded by other wealthy people, both in where they live and where they send their kids to school. MoCo understand this (as do the "consultants" it hires), but will never admit that this guides its decision-making. The wealthy might be OK with some poors, just not too many.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

+1

Concentrating proverty in one school when both are right next to each other is just absurd.

LOL, you must be new here. Concentrating poverty is basically MoCo's approach to everything. It's why all the apartment buildings with huge numbers of affordable units and the homeless shelters get built in Silver Spring instead of neighboring Bethesda.

Yes, I am new to this area. Bethesda and Silver Spring at least have some distance, but yes no reason to not spread low income housing in Bethesda. Putting all poverty in one area or one school is net negative for society.

Here I find it very puzzling. Woodward and WJ are less than a mile from each other on the same road. It's just insane to make two schools so different.

There's not "no reason." There's a cost to building anything, and Bethesda land is very valuable. It doesn't make economic sense to put a lot of subsidized units there. If you want to increase values elsewhere, build more infrastructure (and make sure to invest in safety) to make those areas as appealing.

It makes tons of economic sense since the economic engine of Bethesda is small businesses that rely on workers who can't afford housing in Bethesda unless it is subsidized. It's been shown time and again that businesses don't do well when workers can't afford to live nearby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Area zoned for Woodward currently attends WJ.

Woodward having twice the FARMS rate means, any area zoned for Woodward should have downward pressure.

30% FARMS is way different school than WJ.

I mean, WJ is at about 20% and extremely overcrowded. 30% in a brand new facility where kids can walk through the halls and make sports teams sounds nice.

WJ is getting split in two HS.

One will have 15%
Another will have 30%

Take your pick, where housing will be doing better. That was the question. 50% increase in FARMS rate is a lot. 20->30->40 it becomes a slipperly slope.

Let’s get the facts right. Today WJ has about 20% FARMS. Under the newer options, WJ ends up with about 15% and Woodward somewhere just south of 30%.

Yes, it translates to 50% increase in FARMS rate for Woodward.
It alaso translates to 25% decrease in FARMS rate for WJ.

Two school les than a mile apart.

Horrible job by MCPS and consultants. Easily could have balance( 20-22% in each) rather than concentratong poverty in one HS.

+1

Concentrating proverty in one school when both are right next to each other is just absurd.

LOL, you must be new here. Concentrating poverty is basically MoCo's approach to everything. It's why all the apartment buildings with huge numbers of affordable units and the homeless shelters get built in Silver Spring instead of neighboring Bethesda.

Yes, I am new to this area. Bethesda and Silver Spring at least have some distance, but yes no reason to not spread low income housing in Bethesda. Putting all poverty in one area or one school is net negative for society.

Here I find it very puzzling. Woodward and WJ are less than a mile from each other on the same road. It's just insane to make two schools so different.

There's not "no reason." There's a cost to building anything, and Bethesda land is very valuable. It doesn't make economic sense to put a lot of subsidized units there. If you want to increase values elsewhere, build more infrastructure (and make sure to invest in safety) to make those areas as appealing.

It makes tons of economic sense since the economic engine of Bethesda is small businesses that rely on workers who can't afford housing in Bethesda unless it is subsidized. It's been shown time and again that businesses don't do well when workers can't afford to live nearby.

That is what the purple line is for