Reply to Option H is permanent and the old Wootton HS campus will be closed for good?

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Option H is permanent and the old Wootton HS campus will be closed for good?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.[/quote]

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?[/quote]

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac? 
[/quote]

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense.  Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS.  Which is it?[/quote]

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.[/quote]

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?[/quote]

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.[/quote]

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse. [/quote]

Actually it is.  And, MCPS has closed schools over the years.  Not unlawful.  Reopened some. [/quote]

I see we’re back to this.

Please go back in this thread.

It is lawful to close schools.
It is not lawful to close schools without going through the required processes and procedures to close a school. 
MCPS has not started the procedures necessary to formally close Wootton—those procedures are completely separate and distinct from school boundaries.

Before you say something is legal, perhaps check the law first. Go read the state regulations. I’ll even cite you which one: COMAR 13A.02.09

[b]Option H is de facto closure. It is a school closure disguised in a boundary study[/b]. [/quote]

Couple things here. 
1. It is not clear that this qualifies as a closure.  There is no definition in the code, but counties and municipalities have defined as "decision to permanently end use of a facility as a school."  Don't think that is established here.
2. There is no full analysis of whether what is occurring right now meets those obligations under the code.
3. There is nothing that violates the code if those procedures occur subsequent to this process.
[/quote]

1 & 2 that’s why I said this is a de facto closure and that’s also exactly why Wootton parents will sue. Let the courts answer this. At a minimum this will cause a 2 year delay.
3. This is just factually wrong.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics