Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is easy to identify the outsiders who are claiming to be Wootton parents. Well they are either outsiders or naive to the real estate market. Nobody who knows real estate will deny that Option H will cost most Wootton neighborhoods potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in home equity. Some may not let that drive their entire decision, but anyone who says they don't care about that is either pretending to be Wootton, a renter (very small percentage) , or is extremely wealthy (and many of these people go private anyway). Any reasonable homeowner will factor this into their equation and 95% do. Saying that you literally don't care about this or that the whole thing is about driving distance is hard to believe. No need for troll response. I realize you do not care nor does MCPS care. I am speaking to those in the Wootton cluster

Me again - in the Cold Spring, Cabin John, Wootton cluster and I DO NOT CARE!!!! Option H makes the most fiscal sense for the county as a whole. I cannot expect the county to think about my home value and you should not either. That is selfish.

I have lived in my house for over a decade and I am thankful for the equity built. If some of it disappears (which I do not think it will either way) so be it!

Horizon Hill families love RM and Cold Spring families will love Crown!

You are probably the only cold spring parent who is for H. I also live there. And Crown will be far below RM in performance if this passes. Why did you move to this area if you don’t care about the school rating? Might as well have moved to the GHS cluster if it wasn’t important to you.

1 - I do not believe the school rating will drop dramatically as you seem to think.
2 - I do care about school ratings but I also don't think that adding another elementary school or two of "low performing" "poor" "black/brown" or whatever else you want to say will change that

And please don't tell me that I do not belong here. This is my neighborhood and I belong anywhere I pay my taxes. Trust me that my family has been in this area longer than yours.

The school rating will drop guaranteed-You are having a school that doesn’t even meet 50% proficiency in math or reading join. And then if fields road joins-they also aren’t even at 50% proficiency. How do you think school ratings work? Test scores. If fields joins you are looking at 1/4-1/3 of the school having below 50% proficiency. You don’t think that will have any kind of effect on the school’s overall rating? Are you also not proficient in math? Because that’s the only way you wouldn’t be able to figure this out.

Let's say you are correct. Let's say the test scores go down overall. You do understand that your student will therefore stand out correct? You do understand that very high academic schools do not take many students from the same school and your student coming from an outlier school is an advantage correct?

- signed - you know who it is

Yes and then we lose 400k in equity in our house when the rating drops. I mean you said you don’t care about that-so I guess you are one of the Wootton families that people on the thread are saying are very rich and privileged that you simply don’t care about the investment you have made in your home? Must be nice-trust fund baby? Most of us actually care about the biggest financial investment we ever made/will make.

How crazy is your house that you think $400k is a plausible number? Have you looked at home prices across the King Farm split? They're not nearly what you seem to think.

You think it’s crazy and then you give the example of king farm. Those houses first of all cost less than in Potomac And the difference between a GHS townhouse and a RM townhouse there is about 200k. so double the house cost-double the split.

Really curious where you're seeing these GHS townhomes in King Farm for $200k less than the RM zoned townhomes. Can you post some examples?

Anonymous wrote:"I literally said that the lawsuit would cause delay. Not sure why you are arguing that point."

I see the point you are making but given the way the BOE decides things, a delay in and if itself is a success. If this was delayed by a couple years, what are they going to do with Crown in the interim? Then after the delay as you stated, the whole situation will need to be reevaluated would it not? And that reevaluation will be with new facts and possibly new board members. So it is more than just a delay, it is a full "do over" as the kids would say. Given how this was handled, a 'Do over" is in order. Your concise synapsis of the legal situation has given me new hope.

Anonymous wrote:"I literally said that the lawsuit would cause delay. Not sure why you are arguing that point."

I see the point you are making but given the way the BOE decides things, a delay in and if itself is a success. If this was delayed by a couple years, what are they going to do with Crown in the interim? Then after the delay as you stated, the whole situation will need to be reevaluated would it not? And that reevaluation will be with new facts and possibly new board members. So it is more than just a delay, it is a full "do over" as the kids would say. Given how this was handled, a 'Do over" is in order. Your concise synapsis of the legal situation has given me new hope.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

You're also clearly not a lawyer. There's no chance for Wootton parents to prevail in a verdict. The most they could do would be to drag it out, but the massive cost of operating an extra high school, combined with the massive cost of renovating/rebuilding Wootton, provides a rather strong incentive for MCPS to wait them out.

Though, I think they would be very unlikely to get an injunction if their best argument is calling this a school closure.

Wait them out has different options and closing Wootton doesn’t have to be the solution. They definitely use crown as holding school and achieve the same result.

MCPS doesn’t really want that because it will expose their ineptitude in building Crown in the first place.

This is a weird take. If you agree the school isn't needed based on current projections, then how could you ever justify rebuilding another school just 2 miles away? Wouldn't you expect any rational facilities planning process to conclude with Option H?

No. Why not use Crown as a holding school?

Then what? There are only so many schools close enough to Crown to make that viable, and even fewer when you exclude the schools with enough space to build replacements on-site.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

You're also clearly not a lawyer. There's no chance for Wootton parents to prevail in a verdict. The most they could do would be to drag it out, but the massive cost of operating an extra high school, combined with the massive cost of renovating/rebuilding Wootton, provides a rather strong incentive for MCPS to wait them out.

Though, I think they would be very unlikely to get an injunction if their best argument is calling this a school closure.

Wait them out has different options and closing Wootton doesn’t have to be the solution. They definitely use crown as holding school and achieve the same result.

MCPS doesn’t really want that because it will expose their ineptitude in building Crown in the first place.

This is a weird take. If you agree the school isn't needed based on current projections, then how could you ever justify rebuilding another school just 2 miles away? Wouldn't you expect any rational facilities planning process to conclude with Option H?

No. Why not use Crown as a holding school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

Not PP, but I am a lawyer and I have litigated cases like this one (if you mean a case against a state or local governmental entity that asserts noncompliance with procedural requirements). Seems unlikely anybody on this thread has litigated a similar fact pattern.

I think there are two questions that are getting mixed up here.

1, Would filing a lawsuit delay any move from happening? Very likely yes.
2. Would the plaintiff likely prevail on the merits? Likely no.

So if folks want to use the legal system as a delay tactic, go for it. It is a common practice, though something I think personally is improper in that it waste governmental resources (and tax payer money).
And in my experience the case would likely be decided on summary judgment. There are no disputes of fact here, only of legal interpretation.

I’m the lawyer PP and have litigated cases like this one over decades of legal practice. Summary judgment requires discovery and a fully developed record to determine if there any disputed material facts. That means depositions and document production. I don’t know about you, but MD courts are not the Rocket Docket and this case could take a few years to even reach the summary judgment stage, much less a trial date. And by the way, there are numerous cases around the country involving school relocation and building closures. There are also quite a few cases involving arbitrary and capricious administrative decisions by school boards. Suffice it to say, MCPS does not want this situation in the courts.

I literally said that the lawsuit would cause delay. Not sure why you are arguing that point.

You also said it would be merely a delaying tactic because it would not likely succeed on the merits. It’s not that binary of an equation, particularly if discovery and media coverage exposes mismanagement and/or corruption. Oftentimes these are the reason(s) for an agency decision that is challenged in court.

Litigation has a tendency to get the parties to the negotiation table when one party was disinclined to do so previously.

Where was this concern was Crown HS was proposed for construction? Do you still have copies of your testimony to the BoE calling out the corrupt process that authorized it?

Tell me you don’t know the facts and chronology of this situation without telling me you don’t. Suffice it to say, there is enough here to make a color able legal claim and likely get temporary equitable relief.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

You're also clearly not a lawyer. There's no chance for Wootton parents to prevail in a verdict. The most they could do would be to drag it out, but the massive cost of operating an extra high school, combined with the massive cost of renovating/rebuilding Wootton, provides a rather strong incentive for MCPS to wait them out.

Though, I think they would be very unlikely to get an injunction if their best argument is calling this a school closure.

Wait them out has different options and closing Wootton doesn’t have to be the solution. They definitely use crown as holding school and achieve the same result.

MCPS doesn’t really want that because it will expose their ineptitude in building Crown in the first place.

This is a weird take. If you agree the school isn't needed based on current projections, then how could you ever justify rebuilding another school just 2 miles away? Wouldn't you expect any rational facilities planning process to conclude with Option H?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

Not PP, but I am a lawyer and I have litigated cases like this one (if you mean a case against a state or local governmental entity that asserts noncompliance with procedural requirements). Seems unlikely anybody on this thread has litigated a similar fact pattern.

I think there are two questions that are getting mixed up here.

1, Would filing a lawsuit delay any move from happening? Very likely yes.
2. Would the plaintiff likely prevail on the merits? Likely no.

So if folks want to use the legal system as a delay tactic, go for it. It is a common practice, though something I think personally is improper in that it waste governmental resources (and tax payer money).
And in my experience the case would likely be decided on summary judgment. There are no disputes of fact here, only of legal interpretation.

I’m the lawyer PP and have litigated cases like this one over decades of legal practice. Summary judgment requires discovery and a fully developed record to determine if there any disputed material facts. That means depositions and document production. I don’t know about you, but MD courts are not the Rocket Docket and this case could take a few years to even reach the summary judgment stage, much less a trial date. And by the way, there are numerous cases around the country involving school relocation and building closures. There are also quite a few cases involving arbitrary and capricious administrative decisions by school boards. Suffice it to say, MCPS does not want this situation in the courts.

I literally said that the lawsuit would cause delay. Not sure why you are arguing that point.

You also said it would be merely a delaying tactic because it would not likely succeed on the merits. It’s not that binary of an equation, particularly if discovery and media coverage exposes mismanagement and/or corruption. Oftentimes these are the reason(s) for an agency decision that is challenged in court.

Litigation has a tendency to get the parties to the negotiation table when one party was disinclined to do so previously.

Where was this concern was Crown HS was proposed for construction? Do you still have copies of your testimony to the BoE calling out the corrupt process that authorized it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

Not PP, but I am a lawyer and I have litigated cases like this one (if you mean a case against a state or local governmental entity that asserts noncompliance with procedural requirements). Seems unlikely anybody on this thread has litigated a similar fact pattern.

I think there are two questions that are getting mixed up here.

1, Would filing a lawsuit delay any move from happening? Very likely yes.
2. Would the plaintiff likely prevail on the merits? Likely no.

So if folks want to use the legal system as a delay tactic, go for it. It is a common practice, though something I think personally is improper in that it waste governmental resources (and tax payer money).
And in my experience the case would likely be decided on summary judgment. There are no disputes of fact here, only of legal interpretation.

I’m the lawyer PP and have litigated cases like this one over decades of legal practice. Summary judgment requires discovery and a fully developed record to determine if there any disputed material facts. That means depositions and document production. I don’t know about you, but MD courts are not the Rocket Docket and this case could take a few years to even reach the summary judgment stage, much less a trial date. And by the way, there are numerous cases around the country involving school relocation and building closures. There are also quite a few cases involving arbitrary and capricious administrative decisions by school boards. Suffice it to say, MCPS does not want this situation in the courts.

I literally said that the lawsuit would cause delay. Not sure why you are arguing that point.

You also said it would be merely a delaying tactic because it would not likely succeed on the merits. It’s not that binary of an equation, particularly if discovery and media coverage exposes mismanagement and/or corruption. Oftentimes these are the reason(s) for an agency decision that is challenged in court.

Litigation has a tendency to get the parties to the negotiation table when one party was disinclined to do so previously.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

You're also clearly not a lawyer. There's no chance for Wootton parents to prevail in a verdict. The most they could do would be to drag it out, but the massive cost of operating an extra high school, combined with the massive cost of renovating/rebuilding Wootton, provides a rather strong incentive for MCPS to wait them out.

Though, I think they would be very unlikely to get an injunction if their best argument is calling this a school closure.

Wait them out has different options and closing Wootton doesn’t have to be the solution. They definitely use crown as holding school and achieve the same result.

MCPS doesn’t really want that because it will expose their ineptitude in building Crown in the first place.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

Not PP, but I am a lawyer and I have litigated cases like this one (if you mean a case against a state or local governmental entity that asserts noncompliance with procedural requirements). Seems unlikely anybody on this thread has litigated a similar fact pattern.

I think there are two questions that are getting mixed up here.

1, Would filing a lawsuit delay any move from happening? Very likely yes.
2. Would the plaintiff likely prevail on the merits? Likely no.

So if folks want to use the legal system as a delay tactic, go for it. It is a common practice, though something I think personally is improper in that it waste governmental resources (and tax payer money).
And in my experience the case would likely be decided on summary judgment. There are no disputes of fact here, only of legal interpretation.

I’m the lawyer PP and have litigated cases like this one over decades of legal practice. Summary judgment requires discovery and a fully developed record to determine if there any disputed material facts. That means depositions and document production. I don’t know about you, but MD courts are not the Rocket Docket and this case could take a few years to even reach the summary judgment stage, much less a trial date. And by the way, there are numerous cases around the country involving school relocation and building closures. There are also quite a few cases involving arbitrary and capricious administrative decisions by school boards. Suffice it to say, MCPS does not want this situation in the courts.

I literally said that the lawsuit would cause delay. Not sure why you are arguing that point.

Why would that waste public resources, if they are building a school no one wants?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All you Wootton crazies - just shut up

I'm more concerned about the Regional magnets and looks like this thread keeps getting longer and longer and bumped so the rest of us will forget about that.

Actually I have questions about H and regional magnets. Under any other option A-F, Crown (with its state-of-the-art labs) is in region 5. Under H, Crown/Wootton (whatever you call it) is under region 4.

How do we feel about option H handing a brand new amazing STEM centric school to a region that is already well-resourced over the under-resourced Gaithersburg community that is also overcrowded.

Do we care that Option H completely screws over Gaithersburg?

For all the people who say they are pro H to diversify Wootton, please do tell—how can you support an option that “steals” a school meant for a community of lower income and less resourced and hands it over to the privileged folks of Rockville and Potomac?

The cognitive dissonance doesn't make sense. Either Wootton is rich and privileged - doesn't deserve a new building, or Wootton is being given a "gift" that it should be forced to take for the good of MCPS. Which is it?

It's really not that complicated once you stop being deliberately obtuse. While people might disagree on relative priority, most would agree Wootton is nearing the end of its functional lifespan and will soon need a major renovation or to be rebuilt.

The people opposed to H don't want to stick with current Wootton building. They instead want MCPS to build them a school that the district doesn't actually need because they think it will help their property values.

So let’s say we give Wootton this brand new school. Again for the countless time: do we care or don’t care that H moves Crown/Wootton to region 4? Do we care or don’t care that this would give all the brand new, state of art labs and resources to Rockville and Potomac residents (Wootton, Churchill, RM) when this was supposed to be for under-resourced yet over populated Gaithersburg?

PP, by your own logic, MCPS is giving H to “privileged” parents of Wootton. How do you feel about the entire Gaithersburg community losing access to Crown, when every other option A-G gives Crown to Region 5?

Longer-term, it isn't good for Region 5 to have MCPS paying for a high school that it doesn't need.

Even longer term, it isn’t good for anyone in the school system for MCPS to spend money breaking ground on a new school it doesn’t need, use faulty enrollment numbers, not renovate another school that they have neglected for decades, and then instead of fixing the neglected school, punishes it by closing it altogether.

If we’re talking about the long term, pretty sure setting an unlawful precedent is worse.

Strongly disagree. Circumstances and data change. When a previous decision is no longer justified by the current situation and data, or (gasp!) if that decision was made in error, and there is still an opportunity to make a better decision, we should take it. Blindly continuing down a wasteful path due to a decision made 20 years ago would be the awful precedent.

It's absurd to characterize option H as "punishing" people in the Wootton zone. We know in the short-to-moderate term we would need a new building for Wootton. And we just so happen to have an available building just 2.3 miles away.

So you’re suggesting that Wootton get 100% of the former Crown and Taylor agrees not to move 500+ GHS kids into the new Wootton? This would make sense if MCPS is correct that the numbers don’t support a new high school at Crown anymore. However, I wonder how GHS parents would feel about MCPS “stealing” their new school and giving it to Wootton. Oh wait, we already know this from the hearings last week.

If you’re saying that Wootton has to move AND has to absorb kids through a boundary change, then you’re creating a new school and closing the old Wootton.

You can play with semantics all you like, but a judge is unlikely to agree, at least in the short term due to irreparable harm to Wootton families. MCPS doesn’t want this situation anywhere near a courtroom because it would be forced to open Crown with only 500 GHS kids. Any more kids than that and MCPS can’t close Wootton and move it to Crown.

As you seem to understand, changing buildings is not closing a school. And while boundary changes are often controversial, they also are not considered closing a school and creating a new one. It is ridiculous to claim a combination of those things is closing a school.

Adding to that, when there's ambiguity in law, courts defer to the agency, and they consider legislative intent. Both side with MCPS. The legislative intent is to provide notice and community input. That was obviously done here.

Are you a lawyer? Have you litigated cases like this one? I have and can tell you it’s nowhere near as simple and straightforward as you describe. As noted in this thread, there is no definition as to what constitutes a school closure. A court will want evidence and extensive briefing before it makes a decision that could affect thousands of families and have multiple millions of dollars in potential impact. There is also the backing off of Options A-D and the curious timing of the release of Option H. These raise questions as to whether an MCPS is acting illegally or arbitrarily and capriciously. In the meantime, the court may grant a preliminary injunction to maintain the status quo.

Not PP, but I am a lawyer and I have litigated cases like this one (if you mean a case against a state or local governmental entity that asserts noncompliance with procedural requirements). Seems unlikely anybody on this thread has litigated a similar fact pattern.

I think there are two questions that are getting mixed up here.

1, Would filing a lawsuit delay any move from happening? Very likely yes.
2. Would the plaintiff likely prevail on the merits? Likely no.

So if folks want to use the legal system as a delay tactic, go for it. It is a common practice, though something I think personally is improper in that it waste governmental resources (and tax payer money).
And in my experience the case would likely be decided on summary judgment. There are no disputes of fact here, only of legal interpretation.

I’m the lawyer PP and have litigated cases like this one over decades of legal practice. Summary judgment requires discovery and a fully developed record to determine if there any disputed material facts. That means depositions and document production. I don’t know about you, but MD courts are not the Rocket Docket and this case could take a few years to even reach the summary judgment stage, much less a trial date. And by the way, there are numerous cases around the country involving school relocation and building closures. There are also quite a few cases involving arbitrary and capricious administrative decisions by school boards. Suffice it to say, MCPS does not want this situation in the courts.

I literally said that the lawsuit would cause delay. Not sure why you are arguing that point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is easy to identify the outsiders who are claiming to be Wootton parents. Well they are either outsiders or naive to the real estate market. Nobody who knows real estate will deny that Option H will cost most Wootton neighborhoods potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in home equity. Some may not let that drive their entire decision, but anyone who says they don't care about that is either pretending to be Wootton, a renter (very small percentage) , or is extremely wealthy (and many of these people go private anyway). Any reasonable homeowner will factor this into their equation and 95% do. Saying that you literally don't care about this or that the whole thing is about driving distance is hard to believe. No need for troll response. I realize you do not care nor does MCPS care. I am speaking to those in the Wootton cluster

Me again - in the Cold Spring, Cabin John, Wootton cluster and I DO NOT CARE!!!! Option H makes the most fiscal sense for the county as a whole. I cannot expect the county to think about my home value and you should not either. That is selfish.

I have lived in my house for over a decade and I am thankful for the equity built. If some of it disappears (which I do not think it will either way) so be it!

Horizon Hill families love RM and Cold Spring families will love Crown!

You are probably the only cold spring parent who is for H. I also live there. And Crown will be far below RM in performance if this passes. Why did you move to this area if you don’t care about the school rating? Might as well have moved to the GHS cluster if it wasn’t important to you.

1 - I do not believe the school rating will drop dramatically as you seem to think.
2 - I do care about school ratings but I also don't think that adding another elementary school or two of "low performing" "poor" "black/brown" or whatever else you want to say will change that

And please don't tell me that I do not belong here. This is my neighborhood and I belong anywhere I pay my taxes. Trust me that my family has been in this area longer than yours.

The school rating will drop guaranteed-You are having a school that doesn’t even meet 50% proficiency in math or reading join. And then if fields road joins-they also aren’t even at 50% proficiency. How do you think school ratings work? Test scores. If fields joins you are looking at 1/4-1/3 of the school having below 50% proficiency. You don’t think that will have any kind of effect on the school’s overall rating? Are you also not proficient in math? Because that’s the only way you wouldn’t be able to figure this out.

Let's say you are correct. Let's say the test scores go down overall. You do understand that your student will therefore stand out correct? You do understand that very high academic schools do not take many students from the same school and your student coming from an outlier school is an advantage correct?

- signed - you know who it is

Yes and then we lose 400k in equity in our house when the rating drops. I mean you said you don’t care about that-so I guess you are one of the Wootton families that people on the thread are saying are very rich and privileged that you simply don’t care about the investment you have made in your home? Must be nice-trust fund baby? Most of us actually care about the biggest financial investment we ever made/will make.

How crazy is your house that you think $400k is a plausible number? Have you looked at home prices across the King Farm split? They're not nearly what you seem to think.

You think it’s crazy and then you give the example of king farm. Those houses first of all cost less than in Potomac And the difference between a GHS townhouse and a RM townhouse there is about 200k. so double the house cost-double the split.