Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Presumably they'd argue"

Sounds like a lot of billable hours to me. and more importantly, as you pointed out earlier, delays.

Which arguments end up being deemed plausible are unknown but the billable hours and the delay is almost a certainty.

The current status is not acceptable to many. Changing that status to delay and "do over" seems attractive.

As to whether this delay would be a good use of public money, is of course a valid point. When a question like that is asked in many instances, that would be a time to suggest negotiations or arbitration. Not sure if that step has been done here

My point is that you'd never get the temporary injunction. At least, not long enough to prevent Crown from opening.

In some magical case where you did, the expense of operating an extra school, combined with maintenance (and eventual replacement) costs of an aging school, mean the best use, long-term, of taxpayer funds would strongly argue in waiting out court case. Particularly since you seem to agree Wootton parents can't win on the merits.

Wootton families don’t care if Crown opens and wouldn’t ask a judge to block it from doing so. They will ask a judge to block Wootton from being closed and moved to Crown. They actually have a pretty good case for this.

That would mean ordering an extra school to be operated, at significant public expense. That isn't likely to happen.

But I'm sure a lawyer would be happy to take your money.

Anonymous wrote:Crown will be a holding school so that everyone can use it for a couple of years. Fair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Presumably they'd argue"

Sounds like a lot of billable hours to me. and more importantly, as you pointed out earlier, delays.

Which arguments end up being deemed plausible are unknown but the billable hours and the delay is almost a certainty.

The current status is not acceptable to many. Changing that status to delay and "do over" seems attractive.

As to whether this delay would be a good use of public money, is of course a valid point. When a question like that is asked in many instances, that would be a time to suggest negotiations or arbitration. Not sure if that step has been done here

My point is that you'd never get the temporary injunction. At least, not long enough to prevent Crown from opening.

In some magical case where you did, the expense of operating an extra school, combined with maintenance (and eventual replacement) costs of an aging school, mean the best use, long-term, of taxpayer funds would strongly argue in waiting out court case. Particularly since you seem to agree Wootton parents can't win on the merits.

Wootton families don’t care if Crown opens and wouldn’t ask a judge to block it from doing so. They will ask a judge to block Wootton from being closed and moved to Crown. They actually have a pretty good case for this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Presumably they'd argue"

Sounds like a lot of billable hours to me. and more importantly, as you pointed out earlier, delays.

Which arguments end up being deemed plausible are unknown but the billable hours and the delay is almost a certainty.

The current status is not acceptable to many. Changing that status to delay and "do over" seems attractive.

As to whether this delay would be a good use of public money, is of course a valid point. When a question like that is asked in many instances, that would be a time to suggest negotiations or arbitration. Not sure if that step has been done here

My point is that you'd never get the temporary injunction. At least, not long enough to prevent Crown from opening.

In some magical case where you did, the expense of operating an extra school, combined with maintenance (and eventual replacement) costs of an aging school, mean the best use, long-term, of taxpayer funds would strongly argue in waiting out court case. Particularly since you seem to agree Wootton parents can't win on the merits.

Anonymous wrote:"Presumably they'd argue"

Sounds like a lot of billable hours to me. and more importantly, as you pointed out earlier, delays.

Which arguments end up being deemed plausible are unknown but the billable hours and the delay is almost a certainty.

The current status is not acceptable to many. Changing that status to delay and "do over" seems attractive.

As to whether this delay would be a good use of public money, is of course a valid point. When a question like that is asked in many instances, that would be a time to suggest negotiations or arbitration. Not sure if that step has been done here

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:

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.

Ok but then how do you explain their plan to use Wootton as a holding school? Isn’t that the same issue? And Wootton is even further out than Crown is from the other schools that need renovation.

MCPS is saying the school needs repairs and will eventually get them. Parents are saying that's not good enough and they want an imediate fix. So, they were offered Crown and still complaining.

What is your solution? Parents are complaining, don't like the options provided but refuse to offer better ideas.

I'd be skeptical of those future promises, too. More likely, Wootton would just get closed and the students redistributed. Unless people in that part of the county start supporting higher density redevelopment, but that seems incredibly unlikely.

Option H is pretty much the only long-term path for keeping the Wootton community intact.

This is just wrong. The reason why Wootton cluster hate H is because they see the writing on the wall. H right now keeps us in tact but what happens in the future?

Federal jobs will come back, immigration will come back, international students will come back, new developments in Rockville and Rio are popping up.

In the long term, one of two things will happen: Wootton is demolished. The properties that used to be walkable to Wootton—that many families like my ow bought because of rumblings of boundary studies in 2017-2018—will be the first one to be reassigned. Fallsmead and Cold Spring will be moved to RM the moment Crown gets too big with Wootton gone.

Or the other option is:
Wootton is rebuild after its status as a holding school. When they move kids back on Wootton Parkway from Crown, do we seriously think Dufief is being moved back?

The writing is on the wall. H, sooner or later, will result in the cluster breaking apart.

You can argue whether or not people should care about the cluster breaking apart. And maybe some people don’t care 🤷🏻‍♀️. But you cannot argue that H keeps Wootton cluster intact in the long term. It’ll keep it intact at best for 6 years…then Wootton will either have to be demolished or rebuild, and another boundary study will happen.

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:

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.

Ok but then how do you explain their plan to use Wootton as a holding school? Isn’t that the same issue? And Wootton is even further out than Crown is from the other schools that need renovation.

MCPS is saying the school needs repairs and will eventually get them. Parents are saying that's not good enough and they want an imediate fix. So, they were offered Crown and still complaining.

What is your solution? Parents are complaining, don't like the options provided but refuse to offer better ideas.

I'd be skeptical of those future promises, too. More likely, Wootton would just get closed and the students redistributed. Unless people in that part of the county start supporting higher density redevelopment, but that seems incredibly unlikely.

Option H is pretty much the only long-term path for keeping the Wootton community intact.

Anonymous wrote:" it will make it harder to plausibly argue for injunctive relief that requires the continued operation of that building."

Agreed, but MCPS has an even more implausible argument. The school is either usable or it isn't. What is the MCPS position? It seems that they think it is usable. OK then. We want to stay in the existing building.

Just because a tenant (the Wootton cluster) complains about plumbing and mold does not give the landlord the right to perform forced eviction. Unless of course the building is condemned which it has clearly not been if there is consideration for continued use 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: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?

This logic doesn't make sense, especially when you are comparing a townhome to a house. The economy is not great right now and lots of people have or are in the process of losing their jobs and may not have the funds to buy yoru overpriced house.

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:

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.

Ok but then how do you explain their plan to use Wootton as a holding school? Isn’t that the same issue? And Wootton is even further out than Crown is from the other schools that need renovation.

MCPS is saying the school needs repairs and will eventually get them. Parents are saying that's not good enough and they want an imediate fix. So, they were offered Crown and still complaining.

What is your solution? Parents are complaining, don't like the options provided but refuse to offer better ideas.

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:

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.

Ok but then how do you explain their plan to use Wootton as a holding school? Isn’t that the same issue? And Wootton is even further out than Crown is from the other schools that need renovation.

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:

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.

Ok but then how do you explain their plan to use Wootton as a holding school? Isn’t that the same issue? And Wootton is even further out than Crown is from the other schools that need renovation.