Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Tear down SSIMS and give piney branch a new pool when they already have one… make it make sense. Perhaps a Cake video…
They're not tearing down SSIMS.
Anonymous wrote:The P.E. teacher does swim units throughout the year where students do use the pool. The parent community was very passionate about keeping the pool.
Anonymous wrote:Tear down SSIMS and give piney branch a new pool when they already have one… make it make sense. Perhaps a Cake video…
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is it possible county funds are being used. I seem to remember our ES got an enhanced gym for community use too.
This is what I'm thinking and wondering too. From what I could tell the few times I went in there a while back, the pool at Gaithersburg Middle School was run by Gaithersburg City staff.
So maybe the funding would be shared by the local city/government and some of the extra funding would go to the overall school too.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Other than running away from a perceived threat, swimming is the only sport that can legitimately save your life. We should be so lucky as to have pools in more schools, but if we are going to have even one, it should be in a community that needs it. PB serves a geographic area that does not otherwise have easy access to a public pool for kids to learn to be safe in the water - both the kids at the school and the kids from the surrounding neighborhoods. I think my only wish list would be that if there is MCPS money in the pool, water-safety classes should be required of all students at the ES (which I think historically might have been done?).
Other than being a taxpayer and an MCPS parent, I have no stake in PB - it's too far from my home for us to use it. But I know what a difference our local public pool has made in my family's life. It is an extremely important community resource.
That is just incorrect.
Anonymous wrote:Is it possible county funds are being used. I seem to remember our ES got an enhanced gym for community use too.
Anonymous wrote:Other than running away from a perceived threat, swimming is the only sport that can legitimately save your life. We should be so lucky as to have pools in more schools, but if we are going to have even one, it should be in a community that needs it. PB serves a geographic area that does not otherwise have easy access to a public pool for kids to learn to be safe in the water - both the kids at the school and the kids from the surrounding neighborhoods. I think my only wish list would be that if there is MCPS money in the pool, water-safety classes should be required of all students at the ES (which I think historically might have been done?).
Other than being a taxpayer and an MCPS parent, I have no stake in PB - it's too far from my home for us to use it. But I know what a difference our local public pool has made in my family's life. It is an extremely important community resource.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why are they spending money on building early childhood centers? Pre-K can be operated by high quality child care providers at lower cost and is much more convenient for working families. And the more Pre-K classes there are in schools, the more it destabilizes the child care market and leads to higher prices for families and child care program closures. It's one thing to go ahead with it despite that if you actually have the classroom space available. But it's just stupid to spend tens of millions of dollars on facilities cost for something that's not necessary and is arguably harmful to the county.
Blueprint requires and lack of high quality Pre-K. Go listen to the updated they’ve provided specifically on this area
The Blueprint requires that between 50-100% of each county's Pre-K slots be located at private child care providers. Montgomery County is at 5%, with only a couple hundred slots through private providers so far. Their focus absolutely should be on growing the private side, not wasting our tax dollars on unnecessary physical facilities for public early childhood centers.
Anonymous wrote:Other than running away from a perceived threat, swimming is the only sport that can legitimately save your life. We should be so lucky as to have pools in more schools, but if we are going to have even one, it should be in a community that needs it. PB serves a geographic area that does not otherwise have easy access to a public pool for kids to learn to be safe in the water - both the kids at the school and the kids from the surrounding neighborhoods. I think my only wish list would be that if there is MCPS money in the pool, water-safety classes should be required of all students at the ES (which I think historically might have been done?).
Other than being a taxpayer and an MCPS parent, I have no stake in PB - it's too far from my home for us to use it. But I know what a difference our local public pool has made in my family's life. It is an extremely important community resource.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And why are they spending money on building early childhood centers? Pre-K can be operated by high quality child care providers at lower cost and is much more convenient for working families. And the more Pre-K classes there are in schools, the more it destabilizes the child care market and leads to higher prices for families and child care program closures. It's one thing to go ahead with it despite that if you actually have the classroom space available. But it's just stupid to spend tens of millions of dollars on facilities cost for something that's not necessary and is arguably harmful to the county.
Blueprint requires and lack of high quality Pre-K. Go listen to the updated they’ve provided specifically on this area