Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are people voting now when the rest of the options aren't even out yet? Wait until Dec 1st

12,000 already did per MCPS email tonight. What are you waiting for? Go with B

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entitled GP folks actually saying “WJ is in GP DNA” - they are absolutely trying to be zoned to WJ despite the fact Einstein is a full *MILE* closer to them

Woodward will be inferior to WJ, Whitman, BCC, Chirchill, RM, Wootton and many more HS when it comes to higher level courses.

Current WJ > Future WJ >> Woodward

---------------------------

What is wrong with wanting to be zoned at a better school esp since it it preserves the status quo those people "signed up for"? If I am WJ currently, I would fight to maintain WJ. BCC and Whitman are pleased to maintain status quo. (Unrelated, there are Kensington and Kensington Parkwood families closer to Einstein than GP, who are WJ under all options.)

Garrett Park folks are currently at WJ I believe. Why wouldn't they want to maintain it? It's been that way for generations. They have relationships with that school for decades. Do you know how hard and long it takes a "Start up" to get up an running? News flash...many fail. Let alone a government run start up? Woodward will be inferior for at least a generation. Additionally, you can put your head in the sand, but many mention the High FARMS rates do affect education quality. And an arts magnet is not exactly a rigorous education. There is an evident disparity between WJ and Woodward.

The other more seemingly more disgusting entitlement is those who think they are entitled to a "brand new school" and have the ability to "hand pick teachers" in a government run enterprise. Talk about entitled.

It looks like under option B, they maintain the status quo for broader Garrett Park and keeps as much of that area together. Other options split up more segments of that neighborhood between Woodward and WJ. Under no option is Einstein on the table.

calling it "Garrett park proper" and "this small, wonderful area we live in" sounded entitled too. they love "diversity" except when that diverse opinion is different than theirs. so in reality they want conformity and def come across as entitled to new construction and new facilities.

It won't be new anymore by the time they actually open new Woodward. Since it is a now holding school getting mucked up by Northwood crew for like 5 years until the switchover. So it is "new-ish" at best. and with the way MCPS maintains buildings it will probably be ragged. They'll get a new auditorium for their useless arts program I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entitled GP folks actually saying “WJ is in GP DNA” - they are absolutely trying to be zoned to WJ despite the fact Einstein is a full *MILE* closer to them

Woodward will be inferior to WJ, Whitman, BCC, Chirchill, RM, Wootton and many more HS when it comes to higher level courses.

Current WJ > Future WJ >> Woodward

---------------------------

What is wrong with wanting to be zoned at a better school esp since it it preserves the status quo those people "signed up for"? If I am WJ currently, I would fight to maintain WJ. BCC and Whitman are pleased to maintain status quo. (Unrelated, there are Kensington and Kensington Parkwood families closer to Einstein than GP, who are WJ under all options.)

Garrett Park folks are currently at WJ I believe. Why wouldn't they want to maintain it? It's been that way for generations. They have relationships with that school for decades. Do you know how hard and long it takes a "Start up" to get up an running? News flash...many fail. Let alone a government run start up? Woodward will be inferior for at least a generation. Additionally, you can put your head in the sand, but many mention the High FARMS rates do affect education quality. And an arts magnet is not exactly a rigorous education. There is an evident disparity between WJ and Woodward.

The other more seemingly more disgusting entitlement is those who think they are entitled to a "brand new school" and have the ability to "hand pick teachers" in a government run enterprise. Talk about entitled.

It looks like under option B, they maintain the status quo for broader Garrett Park and keeps as much of that area together. Other options split up more segments of that neighborhood between Woodward and WJ. Under no option is Einstein on the table.

calling it "Garrett park proper" and "this small, wonderful area we live in" sounded entitled too. they love "diversity" except when that diverse opinion is different than theirs. so in reality they want conformity and def come across as entitled to new construction and new facilities.

The Town of Garrett Park is advocating for option B because it is the only option that does not split the town. Option B zones the town of Garrett Park along with Parkside, Garrett Park Estates, and White Flint Park to WJ. Splitting the area accross Strathmore Ave does not makes sense to the people who live in this area so they are asking to not split.

I see. And Garrett Park is Walter Johnson today. They should stick with that. You don't want woodward arts school if you can avoid it.

I'm glad we stay Einstein in my neighborhood, but hope the new magnets don't mess it up

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entitled GP folks actually saying “WJ is in GP DNA” - they are absolutely trying to be zoned to WJ despite the fact Einstein is a full *MILE* closer to them

Woodward will be inferior to WJ, Whitman, BCC, Chirchill, RM, Wootton and many more HS when it comes to higher level courses.

Current WJ > Future WJ >> Woodward

---------------------------

What is wrong with wanting to be zoned at a better school esp since it it preserves the status quo those people "signed up for"? If I am WJ currently, I would fight to maintain WJ. BCC and Whitman are pleased to maintain status quo. (Unrelated, there are Kensington and Kensington Parkwood families closer to Einstein than GP, who are WJ under all options.)

Garrett Park folks are currently at WJ I believe. Why wouldn't they want to maintain it? It's been that way for generations. They have relationships with that school for decades. Do you know how hard and long it takes a "Start up" to get up an running? News flash...many fail. Let alone a government run start up? Woodward will be inferior for at least a generation. Additionally, you can put your head in the sand, but many mention the High FARMS rates do affect education quality. And an arts magnet is not exactly a rigorous education. There is an evident disparity between WJ and Woodward.

The other more seemingly more disgusting entitlement is those who think they are entitled to a "brand new school" and have the ability to "hand pick teachers" in a government run enterprise. Talk about entitled.

It looks like under option B, they maintain the status quo for broader Garrett Park and keeps as much of that area together. Other options split up more segments of that neighborhood between Woodward and WJ. Under no option is Einstein on the table.

calling it "Garrett park proper" and "this small, wonderful area we live in" sounded entitled too. they love "diversity" except when that diverse opinion is different than theirs. so in reality they want conformity and def come across as entitled to new construction and new facilities.

The Town of Garrett Park is advocating for option B because it is the only option that does not split the town. Option B zones the town of Garrett Park along with Parkside, Garrett Park Estates, and White Flint Park to WJ. Splitting the area accross Strathmore Ave does not makes sense to the people who live in this area so they are asking to not split.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entitled GP folks actually saying “WJ is in GP DNA” - they are absolutely trying to be zoned to WJ despite the fact Einstein is a full *MILE* closer to them

Woodward will be inferior to WJ, Whitman, BCC, Chirchill, RM, Wootton and many more HS when it comes to higher level courses.

Current WJ > Future WJ >> Woodward

---------------------------

What is wrong with wanting to be zoned at a better school esp since it it preserves the status quo those people "signed up for"? If I am WJ currently, I would fight to maintain WJ. BCC and Whitman are pleased to maintain status quo. (Unrelated, there are Kensington and Kensington Parkwood families closer to Einstein than GP, who are WJ under all options.)

Garrett Park folks are currently at WJ I believe. Why wouldn't they want to maintain it? It's been that way for generations. They have relationships with that school for decades. Do you know how hard and long it takes a "Start up" to get up an running? News flash...many fail. Let alone a government run start up? Woodward will be inferior for at least a generation. Additionally, you can put your head in the sand, but many mention the High FARMS rates do affect education quality. And an arts magnet is not exactly a rigorous education. There is an evident disparity between WJ and Woodward.

The other more seemingly more disgusting entitlement is those who think they are entitled to a "brand new school" and have the ability to "hand pick teachers" in a government run enterprise. Talk about entitled.

It looks like under option B, they maintain the status quo for broader Garrett Park and keeps as much of that area together. Other options split up more segments of that neighborhood between Woodward and WJ. Under no option is Einstein on the table.

calling it "Garrett park proper" and "this small, wonderful area we live in" sounded entitled too. they love "diversity" except when that diverse opinion is different than theirs. so in reality they want conformity and def come across as entitled to new construction and new facilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entitled GP folks actually saying “WJ is in GP DNA” - they are absolutely trying to be zoned to WJ despite the fact Einstein is a full *MILE* closer to them

Woodward will be inferior to WJ, Whitman, BCC, Chirchill, RM, Wootton and many more HS when it comes to higher level courses.

Current WJ > Future WJ >> Woodward

---------------------------

What is wrong with wanting to be zoned at a better school esp since it it preserves the status quo those people "signed up for"? If I am WJ currently, I would fight to maintain WJ. BCC and Whitman are pleased to maintain status quo. (Unrelated, there are Kensington and Kensington Parkwood families closer to Einstein than GP, who are WJ under all options.)

Garrett Park folks are currently at WJ I believe. Why wouldn't they want to maintain it? It's been that way for generations. They have relationships with that school for decades. Do you know how hard and long it takes a "Start up" to get up an running? News flash...many fail. Let alone a government run start up? Woodward will be inferior for at least a generation. Additionally, you can put your head in the sand, but many mention the High FARMS rates do affect education quality. And an arts magnet is not exactly a rigorous education. There is an evident disparity between WJ and Woodward.

The other more seemingly more disgusting entitlement is those who think they are entitled to a "brand new school" and have the ability to "hand pick teachers" in a government run enterprise. Talk about entitled.

It looks like under option B, they maintain the status quo for broader Garrett Park and keeps as much of that area together. Other options split up more segments of that neighborhood between Woodward and WJ. Under no option is Einstein on the table.

calling it "Garrett park proper" and "this small, wonderful area we live in" sounded entitled too. they love "diversity" except when that diverse opinion is different than theirs. so in reality they want conformity and def come across as entitled to new construction and new facilities.

It won't be new anymore by the time they actually open new Woodward. Since it is a now holding school getting mucked up by Northwood crew for like 5 years until the switchover. So it is "new-ish" at best. and with the way MCPS maintains buildings it will probably be ragged. They'll get a new auditorium for their useless arts program I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entitled GP folks actually saying “WJ is in GP DNA” - they are absolutely trying to be zoned to WJ despite the fact Einstein is a full *MILE* closer to them

Woodward will be inferior to WJ, Whitman, BCC, Chirchill, RM, Wootton and many more HS when it comes to higher level courses.

Current WJ > Future WJ >> Woodward

---------------------------

What is wrong with wanting to be zoned at a better school esp since it it preserves the status quo those people "signed up for"? If I am WJ currently, I would fight to maintain WJ. BCC and Whitman are pleased to maintain status quo. (Unrelated, there are Kensington and Kensington Parkwood families closer to Einstein than GP, who are WJ under all options.)

Garrett Park folks are currently at WJ I believe. Why wouldn't they want to maintain it? It's been that way for generations. They have relationships with that school for decades. Do you know how hard and long it takes a "Start up" to get up an running? News flash...many fail. Let alone a government run start up? Woodward will be inferior for at least a generation. Additionally, you can put your head in the sand, but many mention the High FARMS rates do affect education quality. And an arts magnet is not exactly a rigorous education. There is an evident disparity between WJ and Woodward.

The other more seemingly more disgusting entitlement is those who think they are entitled to a "brand new school" and have the ability to "hand pick teachers" in a government run enterprise. Talk about entitled.

It looks like under option B, they maintain the status quo for broader Garrett Park and keeps as much of that area together. Other options split up more segments of that neighborhood between Woodward and WJ. Under no option is Einstein on the table.

calling it "Garrett park proper" and "this small, wonderful area we live in" sounded entitled too. they love "diversity" except when that diverse opinion is different than theirs. so in reality they want conformity and def come across as entitled to new construction and new facilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entitled GP folks actually saying “WJ is in GP DNA” - they are absolutely trying to be zoned to WJ despite the fact Einstein is a full *MILE* closer to them

Woodward will be inferior to WJ, Whitman, BCC, Chirchill, RM, Wootton and many more HS when it comes to higher level courses.

Current WJ > Future WJ >> Woodward

---------------------------

What is wrong with wanting to be zoned at a better school esp since it it preserves the status quo those people "signed up for"? If I am WJ currently, I would fight to maintain WJ. BCC and Whitman are pleased to maintain status quo. (Unrelated, there are Kensington and Kensington Parkwood families closer to Einstein than GP, who are WJ under all options.)

Garrett Park folks are currently at WJ I believe. Why wouldn't they want to maintain it? It's been that way for generations. They have relationships with that school for decades. Do you know how hard and long it takes a "Start up" to get up an running? News flash...many fail. Let alone a government run start up? Woodward will be inferior for at least a generation. Additionally, you can put your head in the sand, but many mention the High FARMS rates do affect education quality. And an arts magnet is not exactly a rigorous education. There is an evident disparity between WJ and Woodward.

The other more seemingly more disgusting entitlement is those who think they are entitled to a "brand new school" and have the ability to "hand pick teachers" in a government run enterprise. Talk about entitled.

It looks like under option B, they maintain the status quo for broader Garrett Park and keeps as much of that area together. Other options split up more segments of that neighborhood between Woodward and WJ. Under no option is Einstein on the table.

Anonymous wrote:Why are people voting now when the rest of the options aren't even out yet? Wait until Dec 1st

Anonymous wrote:Why are people voting now when the rest of the options aren't even out yet? Wait until Dec 1st

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted A.

Wait, is it an actual vote? I figure they just ignore the survey and do what they want or people just stuff the boxes

No, it's not a vote, it's a survey.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voted A.

Wait, is it an actual vote? I figure they just ignore the survey and do what they want or people just stuff the boxes

Anonymous wrote:Voted A.