Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Pure fiction. Crown was initially intended to pull from many surrounding clusters, including Gaithersburg, Wootton, Quince Orchard, Richard Montgomery, and Northwest.

Even if that’s true, screw most of those kids, right? You know, a new school they’ve waited 20 years to get.

Wootton doesn't care about anyone but themselves. Instead of waiting their turn and understanding they aren't the only school with serious issues, they are demanding an immediate fix.

Wootton is asking for remediation of immediate problems, not a full renovation. But I'm glad to hear you're against Option H because Wootton is willing to wait its turn.

Many of the schools have immediate problems. So, yes, wait your turn like the rest of us. I don’t care about any of the options as nothing changes for us but our school gets smaller so less staff and even less course offerings but we already have minimal offerings so not sure what can be cut. We will probably go private for our youngest depending on offerings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Pure fiction. Crown was initially intended to pull from many surrounding clusters, including Gaithersburg, Wootton, Quince Orchard, Richard Montgomery, and Northwest.

Even if that’s true, screw most of those kids, right? You know, a new school they’ve waited 20 years to get.

Wootton doesn't care about anyone but themselves. Instead of waiting their turn and understanding they aren't the only school with serious issues, they are demanding an immediate fix.

Wootton is asking for remediation of immediate problems, not a full renovation. But I'm glad to hear you're against Option H because Wootton is willing to wait its turn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Pure fiction. Crown was initially intended to pull from many surrounding clusters, including Gaithersburg, Wootton, Quince Orchard, Richard Montgomery, and Northwest.

Even if that’s true, screw most of those kids, right? You know, a new school they’ve waited 20 years to get.

It's kind of you to worry about that. I'm sure we can redirect some of the kids from Wootton over to GHS so we can send more Gaithersburg students to Crown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Pure fiction. Crown was initially intended to pull from many surrounding clusters, including Gaithersburg, Wootton, Quince Orchard, Richard Montgomery, and Northwest.

Even if that’s true, screw most of those kids, right? You know, a new school they’ve waited 20 years to get.

Wootton doesn't care about anyone but themselves. Instead of waiting their turn and understanding they aren't the only school with serious issues, they are demanding an immediate fix.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Pure fiction. Crown was initially intended to pull from many surrounding clusters, including Gaithersburg, Wootton, Quince Orchard, Richard Montgomery, and Northwest.

Even if that’s true, screw most of those kids, right? You know, a new school they’ve waited 20 years to get.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Pure fiction. Crown was initially intended to pull from many surrounding clusters, including Gaithersburg, Wootton, Quince Orchard, Richard Montgomery, and Northwest.

Even if that’s true, screw most of those kids, right? You know, a new school they’ve waited 20 years to get.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Are you offering to pay for the maintenance and operation of Wootton in the meantime? Or do you expect everyone else to effectively pay for your private school experience?

I think they expect everyone to continue on per usual at the school that has been established to be all but uninhabitable. Cool, bruh.

Remediate the Wootton building. And in your case, remedial reading comprehension class would help.

There is money for remediation.

Where is the money?

The Wootton homeowners have a lot of money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Pure fiction. Crown was initially intended to pull from many surrounding clusters, including Gaithersburg, Wootton, Quince Orchard, Richard Montgomery, and Northwest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a separate legal issue, I'm curious about the development taxes in Crown. While school impact taxes can be used across the county, the same isn't true for UPP taxes. Those are much, much smaller, but they need to be used in that area to increase capacity. Does Crown have enough more teaching stations than Wootton to spend that money? Or will it need to be refunded to the developers?

It would be a lot cheaper to refund that amount than renovate and operate another school, so that would probably still be the right move. I just don't know how that would work.

By my read no refund is required regardless. The money was used to build Crown, which will under Option H given the addition of some population from GHS "that adds capacity designed to alleviate overutilization in the school service area from which the funds were collected." Alternatively, the Crown building itself constitutes "capital projects adding capacity at any school adjacent to the school for which the funds were collected."

It only adds capacity under option H to the extent it has more capacity than the current Wootton facility. The law is pretty clear it needs to be used to increase capacity, not merely for capital improvements.

I'm not sure that is true? It just needs to add more capacity than was in the school service area where the taxes were collected. Excess capacity in other areas isn't relevant to that determination.

Adding to my previous reply to this, note that these taxes were never intended to be used in the specific service area where they were collected. At the time they were collected, I think Crown was zoned for GHS. Crown HS became acceptable as an adjacent zone, as would Wootton.

If Crown is a new service area, then it obviously creates more capacity in that new, adjacent service area. But if Crown instead just services the Wootton service area, then what is the increase capacity?

Again, the UPP taxes aren't very much. If Crown HS technically has slightly more teaching stations than Wootton, then it probably doesn't matter. Those UPP taxes can be allocated to that portion of the construction.

Interesting. My take is that Crown is within the service area, not adjacent. It is, quite literally in the service area from where the taxes were collected. The original plan was to add another school within the service area (boundary) to alleviate overutilization by sending kids from GHS to the new facility. Under Option H it still does that, just not to the extent originally planned.

The service area is set when the taxes are collected. Crown isn't the collected service area-- GHS is. You obviously often can't spend the money in the service area itself, so the law allows the money to be spent to expand capacity in adjacent service areas. Creating an adjacent Crown service area would have done that, Option H doesn't do that. It instead has the money spent in the Wootton service area.

Right? Serious question. I think the law is pretty clear on this, but maybe I'm reading it wrong.

I’m thinking of this differently. The “service area” is the literal geographic boundary for where students wishing the new development are zoned at the time of development. I believe that was the GHS cluster boundary (at the time). Crown is within the geographic confines of that boundary (service area) and is adding capacity for students zoned in that original service area.

The alternative doesn’t make sense to me. If for example a new elementary school was being built to account for development, splitting the prior boundary 50/50, it would be creating a new school within the service area, not a new school in a newly formed adjacent service area.

Hope that makes sense.

(e) The Department of Finance must retain funds collected under this Section in an account to be appropriated for:

(1) any public school improvement that adds capacity designed to alleviate overutilization in the school service area from which the funds were collected; or

(2) for capital projects adding capacity at any school adjacent to the school for which the funds were collected. Adjacent schools must be determined using the Planning Board’s Annual School Utilization Report.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Are you offering to pay for the maintenance and operation of Wootton in the meantime? Or do you expect everyone else to effectively pay for your private school experience?

I think they expect everyone to continue on per usual at the school that has been established to be all but uninhabitable. Cool, bruh.

Remediate the Wootton building. And in your case, remedial reading comprehension class would help.

There is money for remediation.

Where is the money?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Are you offering to pay for the maintenance and operation of Wootton in the meantime? Or do you expect everyone else to effectively pay for your private school experience?

I think they expect everyone to continue on per usual at the school that has been established to be all but uninhabitable. Cool, bruh.

Remediate the Wootton building. And in your case, remedial reading comprehension class would help.

There is money for remediation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"And I do feel the need to clarify that the above analysis is entirely neutral as to: 1) whether Option H should be pursued; or 2) whether closure procedures are or will be followed in this situation"

Fair enough.

There are many who feel H should Not be pursued and that one of the top schools in the county should Not disappear. Meaning it will no longer exist whether it is officially "closed" or not.

So MCPS may or may not not need to call this a closure under the vague definition, of such. Perhaps there should be a new category called "Disappearing a School"? This would allow MCPS avoid any "Closure" discussions and they could just make a school "Disappear"

FTLOG it would be moving to a new site, not disappearing!

PP that the other poster responded to- the school as people now know it is in fact disappearing under Option H. It is disingenuous to claim it isn't. The debate should be around whether that fundamental change is nevertheless in the best interest of the district as a whole.

They don't like the idea of undesirable demographic groups being zoned for the school. But rezoning isn't making a school disappear. Schools and boundaries change.

Who are “they”? Gaithersburg families don’t want Option H either.

As if they would prefer EFG? Under H at least the part of Gaithersburg near crown gets to go.

But the entire Crown was promised to them. What happens when there over capacity issues in a few years. Where will those kids go if Wootton is closed? Makes more sense to use excess capacity at Crown for holding school purposes, as that isn’t permanent. Keep Wootton where it is and remediate (usually 1-3% of a total tear down and renovation). MCPS can then take its time to do things right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if we bypass the whole school closure issue by ultimately (after Damascus and Magruder renovations) Wootton on Wootton Parkway becomes a “regional hub” (inclusive of several of the newly proposed regions) for specialized programs not housed in traditional high schools? This would mean the school isn’t “closed” as a permanent school, ensure the building is renovated eventually, save the cost of operating an additional traditional high school, and would be a great thing for special education students who sometimes share resources/staff.

When did you get your degree from delulu University? Taylor quite literally just cut a bunch of jobs and funding for special education and you are over here thinking he is going to use it as a whole new school for special education? ok then.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a separate legal issue, I'm curious about the development taxes in Crown. While school impact taxes can be used across the county, the same isn't true for UPP taxes. Those are much, much smaller, but they need to be used in that area to increase capacity. Does Crown have enough more teaching stations than Wootton to spend that money? Or will it need to be refunded to the developers?

It would be a lot cheaper to refund that amount than renovate and operate another school, so that would probably still be the right move. I just don't know how that would work.

By my read no refund is required regardless. The money was used to build Crown, which will under Option H given the addition of some population from GHS "that adds capacity designed to alleviate overutilization in the school service area from which the funds were collected." Alternatively, the Crown building itself constitutes "capital projects adding capacity at any school adjacent to the school for which the funds were collected."

It only adds capacity under option H to the extent it has more capacity than the current Wootton facility. The law is pretty clear it needs to be used to increase capacity, not merely for capital improvements.

I'm not sure that is true? It just needs to add more capacity than was in the school service area where the taxes were collected. Excess capacity in other areas isn't relevant to that determination.

Adding to my previous reply to this, note that these taxes were never intended to be used in the specific service area where they were collected. At the time they were collected, I think Crown was zoned for GHS. Crown HS became acceptable as an adjacent zone, as would Wootton.

If Crown is a new service area, then it obviously creates more capacity in that new, adjacent service area. But if Crown instead just services the Wootton service area, then what is the increase capacity?

Again, the UPP taxes aren't very much. If Crown HS technically has slightly more teaching stations than Wootton, then it probably doesn't matter. Those UPP taxes can be allocated to that portion of the construction.

Interesting. My take is that Crown is within the service area, not adjacent. It is, quite literally in the service area from where the taxes were collected. The original plan was to add another school within the service area (boundary) to alleviate overutilization by sending kids from GHS to the new facility. Under Option H it still does that, just not to the extent originally planned.

The service area is set when the taxes are collected. Crown isn't the collected service area-- GHS is. You obviously often can't spend the money in the service area itself, so the law allows the money to be spent to expand capacity in adjacent service areas. Creating an adjacent Crown service area would have done that, Option H doesn't do that. It instead has the money spent in the Wootton service area.

Right? Serious question. I think the law is pretty clear on this, but maybe I'm reading it wrong.

I’m thinking of this differently. The “service area” is the literal geographic boundary for where students wishing the new development are zoned at the time of development. I believe that was the GHS cluster boundary (at the time). Crown is within the geographic confines of that boundary (service area) and is adding capacity for students zoned in that original service area.

The alternative doesn’t make sense to me. If for example a new elementary school was being built to account for development, splitting the prior boundary 50/50, it would be creating a new school within the service area, not a new school in a newly formed adjacent service area.

Hope that makes sense.