Reply to Residents appeal MCPS boundary changes, challenge legality of diversity focus

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Residents appeal MCPS boundary changes, challenge legality of diversity focus"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote]Anonymous wrote:
I really really don't think that adding "shall especially strive" rises to the level of a substantial change, but I guess that's for the relevant body to decide.

As for the assertion that the boundary change was "illegal?" That's nonsense. Changing a school attendance zone is well within the legal purview of the BoE, which was duly elected by the citizens of this county.

As others have noted, someone was going to get reassigned. With a high school doubling in capacity, and adjacent middle schools with dramatic differences in utilization, some group of kids was always going to need to change their attendance pattern.

That it fell on this specific group? I wish they would use all of this unlimited advocacy energy to fight for improvements to their new school.

1. It is illegal to use race to determine boundary assignments. So yes a school board can change boundaries but they have to do so without violating constitutional law.

2. Second point, yes someone was going to get assigned but at the heart of this issue is why this particular was chosen over others. If the BOE had spun a wheel and it was entirely random the BOE would be fine. If the area was geographically adjacent it would be fine. If there was an underutilized public bus route that could be used to save money that only existed there, it would be fine. If this neighborhood had just been built a few years ago and was the newest in the cluster then the BOE could say it chose the area because fewer people had established community ties to the schools. If the BOE used racial data to pick this area then there is a problem. If the BOE used median house value but also had the racial data it could go either way. Its highly unlikely that the BOE did not know the racial make ups of the area and its a risky chance to be untruthful in court and try to claim you only used house value when you've made statements about seeking racial diversity and you have the data.

3. Safety is not something that should be left tp parents to advocate for here. The reasons the teachers do not feel safe at Neelsville is not simply that the students behave in dangerous manners. It is that MCPS and the BOE has failed miserably tp create a safe environment for the teachers AND the at risk students. The changes that MCPS has put in place regarding discipline are at the root of the problems at Neelsville and other schools. If disruptive and dangerous students are allowed to remain in the classroom and receive no consequences for their behaviors, this is how you get a 24% safety rating.

Point 3 -- the issue of "Not feeling safe" is not a legal reason for the appeal or lawsuit. Otherwise, current parents of that MS could file such a lawsuit now, and so could lots of other parents around the country.[/quote]

Other parents could sue and I suspect have sued MCPS over safety in equally unsafe environments. However, whether or not other parents have sued has no bearing on whether its relevant or not. I'm not sure about appeals but law suits require some potential or actual loss to the plaintiff so the data on the low safety rating is relevant from this standpoint.

I think what the lawyers of the Clarksburg case are putting forward is that the Board did not follow due process, selected these plaintiffs based on race, and is assigning them based on race to a lessor school as demonstrated by the low safety ratings. 
[/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