Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Good points by other people, but also, they would need to find the money to make Wootton habitable for this scenario.

They would need to rehabilitate Wootton some if they decide to use it as a holding school, but that can be on a longer timeline and changed based on the CIP plan that the county will need to fund.

Are we sure there's a school that's ready to be sent to a holding school by 2027-2028? Otherwise the prospective holding school would sit empty for some time and it seems more efficient for that to be a school in need of repairs / rehabilitation rather than a brand new school or rebuilt school.

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Woodward is way too far along to pull back on opening it. Also, if Woodward does not open, WJ's overcrowding gets no relief. It's not gonna happen.

That being said, I do agree that if it's ok for Woodward's opening to cause WJ to be underutilized, then it shouldn't be a problem for Crown to open and also be underutilized.

MCPS is not being consistent.

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Woodward is way too far along to pull back on opening it. Also, if Woodward does not open, WJ's overcrowding gets no relief. It's not gonna happen.

That being said, I do agree that if it's ok for Woodward's opening to cause WJ to be underutilized, then it shouldn't be a problem for Crown to open and also be underutilized.

MCPS is not being consistent.

They are trying to avoid opening a 27th high school at a time of declining enrollment, which would save money overall.

So why open Crown? It’s only 50 percent built.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Woodward is way too far along to pull back on opening it. Also, if Woodward does not open, WJ's overcrowding gets no relief. It's not gonna happen.

That being said, I do agree that if it's ok for Woodward's opening to cause WJ to be underutilized, then it shouldn't be a problem for Crown to open and also be underutilized.

MCPS is not being consistent.

They are trying to avoid opening a 27th high school at a time of declining enrollment, which would save money overall.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Woodward is way too far along to pull back on opening it. Also, if Woodward does not open, WJ's overcrowding gets no relief. It's not gonna happen.

That being said, I do agree that if it's ok for Woodward's opening to cause WJ to be underutilized, then it shouldn't be a problem for Crown to open and also be underutilized.

MCPS is not being consistent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Woodward is way too far along to pull back on opening it. Also, if Woodward does not open, WJ's overcrowding gets no relief. It's not gonna happen.

That being said, I do agree that if it's ok for Woodward's opening to cause WJ to be underutilized, then it shouldn't be a problem for Crown to open and also be underutilized.

MCPS is not being consistent.

Anonymous wrote:I saw an interesting post elsewhere. If enrollment is down in the county, MCPS could choose to open Crown as a new high school (while keeping Wootton open) and use Woodward as the holding school instead.

Wootton and Crown are 4 miles apart but Woodward and WJ are only 1 mile apart, so students can easily be zoned to either school. WJ is underenrolled in the recommended plan for the Woodward boundary study. Students could be shifted to Churchill, RM, etc who could then shift students to Wootton/Crown in order to alleviate the current WJ overcrowding and help fill both Wootton and Crown.

Another question on the same topic, why can Woodward open causing WJ to be underenrolled, but it's not ok to open Crown and have that school be underenrolled?

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain how the projections had almost all of the schools (QO, Gaithersburg, RM, Churchill) as overcrowded during the original boundary study but now somehow very suddenly there's declining enrollment and not enough students to fill all the schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be an insanely irresponsible financial decision to open a 27th high school with declining enrollment. Wootton families have been complaining about the state of their building for years. They now get a brand new building and are complaining? Maybe it's not about the building after all....

This. Other schools have worse buildings but they aren’t as well organized or demanding. Schools should be fixed based on priority, not how loud a PTA is. The problem is they compare their school with Whitman (for real, years ago at a BOE meeting a Wootton mom put up a slide with Wootton and Whitman side by side saying Wootton isn’t a rich school, Whitman is). Visit some other areas outside your bubble. If MCPS is deciding what makes the best sense for THE MOST students in MCPS, it’s not building another new high school on the current site of Wootton. There is nothing more financially irresponsible than that, no matter what this community says.

+1 this
RM was supposed to get an expansion years ago and that was squashed due to Crown. Now no one is moving out of RM cluster to relieve overcrowding. I don't understand. There are 10 portables at RM currently.

That's perplexing considering that even if HS #27 were to open at Crown Farm none of RM would have been redistricted anywhere...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be an insanely irresponsible financial decision to open a 27th high school with declining enrollment. Wootton families have been complaining about the state of their building for years. They now get a brand new building and are complaining? Maybe it's not about the building after all....

This. Other schools have worse buildings but they aren’t as well organized or demanding. Schools should be fixed based on priority, not how loud a PTA is. The problem is they compare their school with Whitman (for real, years ago at a BOE meeting a Wootton mom put up a slide with Wootton and Whitman side by side saying Wootton isn’t a rich school, Whitman is). Visit some other areas outside your bubble. If MCPS is deciding what makes the best sense for THE MOST students in MCPS, it’s not building another new high school on the current site of Wootton. There is nothing more financially irresponsible than that, no matter what this community says.

+1 this
RM was supposed to get an expansion years ago and that was squashed due to Crown. Now no one is moving out of RM cluster to relieve overcrowding. I don't understand. There are 10 portables at RM currently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be an insanely irresponsible financial decision to open a 27th high school with declining enrollment. Wootton families have been complaining about the state of their building for years. They now get a brand new building and are complaining? Maybe it's not about the building after all....

This. Other schools have worse buildings but they aren’t as well organized or demanding. Schools should be fixed based on priority, not how loud a PTA is. The problem is they compare their school with Whitman (for real, years ago at a BOE meeting a Wootton mom put up a slide with Wootton and Whitman side by side saying Wootton isn’t a rich school, Whitman is). Visit some other areas outside your bubble. If MCPS is deciding what makes the best sense for THE MOST students in MCPS, it’s not building another new high school on the current site of Wootton. There is nothing more financially irresponsible than that, no matter what this community says.