Reply to 3/9 and 3/10 public hearings

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "3/9 and 3/10 public hearings "

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]I watched yesterday's video recording, and it was not a pleasant experience. BOE chose to let the CO staff to defend their projection, whereas Wootton parents insisted their data were flawed. So they ended up in stuck, and BOE apparently firmly believed in the former. It's a lost war to me from a spectator's perspective. [/quote]

That sets up the BOE’s decision as being arbitrary and capricious. Disregarding clear data flaws is the very definition. If the BOE were smart (and honest) it would redo its numbers. But that would mean Wootton can’t move to Crown in the fall of 2027. [/quote]

The data doesn’t seem flawed. I’ve watched all the presentations even the joint one with planning board. It all seems very defensible and would withstand legal challenge. [/quote]

A court looks at everything - it’s not obligated to believe anyone. [/quote]

Uh no.
No, they look at the record before it. And will defer to policy makers when reasoned. Seems reasoned here. I wouldn’t want to be the one wasting money on this suit. MCPS will win despite you not liking it.[/quote]

So you just made my point. A court looks at everything. It also doesn’t have to defer to policy makers. There is insufficient evidence to indicate a process of reasoned elaboration here - indeed, there is a clear rush to a decision based on external factors. [/quote]

The burden is on plaintiffs to show some kind of law violation. “Insufficient evidence to indicate a process of reasoned elaboration” is ridiculous. There was a scope, there were consultants, there were options, there was feedback.  That’s all part of the process [b]even if the option selected wasn’t always under consideration[/b]. Then there’s the CO recommendation and report, calculations, and cooperation with the Planning Dept.

It doesn’t mean MCPS is right about the numbers. [b]But they don’t have to be right.[/b] Projections are inherently projecting an unknown.  If you could see the future you wouldn’t need projections. For a court, they don’t have to be right, they have to be not arbitrary or discriminatory.

A lawsuit will not win unless the MAGA SC just wants to stick it to Montgomery County enough to do something without a basis in the law, which is of course a real possibility at this point. [/quote]

You just made the case. You can’t have reasoned elaboration if you didn’t actually do it. Proposing and then recommending Option H in less than 2 months is ridiculous, especially when the BOE is now faced with evidence that their numbers are faulty. Also, you do need strong indická that MCPS is right, and the fact that MCPS used faulty projections to build Crown makes its current projections similarly suspect.

And it’s arbitrary and capricious, not discriminatory. [/quote]

The court doesn't replace MCPS's judgment with its own or do its own analysis.  It assesses whether MCPS did a careful and defensible job.  All modeling like this requires a ton of assumptions.  I've not seen any evidence (not the slightest) that MCPS's assumptions were arbitrary.  They are not the assumptions you choose to make but they are certainly defensible.

People also keep arguing "corruption" without any explanation for why MCPS might be motivated to favor Magruder over Wootton.  (And in fact, it seems like reasonable people like Wootton teachers favor this proposal so it's difficult to even make the claim that Wootton is being treated worse than other schools.  You don't personally like the outcome but it seems like many important stakeholders think Wootton is benefiting from this proposal.)[/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