Anonymous wrote:Why don’t other families want to be at SSIMS? Is it because of the condition of the building? Because as PPs have said, Taylor is exaggerating that to make his argument for a holding school.

The fact is the school was on an upswing before this proposal landed. New principal that is very well liked, happy families, etc.

Woodlin and flora singer families should talk to current SSIMS families before making any judgements about the school. They are advocating to keep it open for a reason.

It is far away, would split up our ES, and seems likely to be closed in a few years anyway so we will then have to deal with teachers jumping ship in the last couple years . All of that on top of all the physical facilities issues. Plus we just like Sligo.

Why don’t other families want to be at SSIMS? Is it because of the condition of the building? Because as PPs have said, Taylor is exaggerating that to make his argument for a holding school.

The fact is the school was on an upswing before this proposal landed. New principal that is very well liked, happy families, etc.

Woodlin and flora singer families should talk to current SSIMS families before making any judgements about the school. They are advocating to keep it open for a reason.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oops -- quoted area got messed up. Trying to say:

It's mainly SCES families advocating to save SSIMS, and they are not getting rezoned to another middle school.

I've been at these meetings and this is absolutely not true. It's Sligo Creek Families; current SSIMS and prospective SSIMS families (many of whom are not in the SCES catchment area); teachers and staff including from the French Immersion program; and folks who live in the immediate neighborhood who have concerns both about losing two neighborhood schools and the increase in bus traffic that would result by using the facility for up two schools simultaneously as holding schools.

Are you guys now all going to step up and keep fighting for current SSIMS families to be able to stay at SSIMS (ie insist that options A-D are not acceptable) rather than being replaced by families from other elementary schools who really don't want to go to SSIMS?

Anonymous wrote:Structurally, in its present state, SSIMS is not safe to remain open. So if they're not closing it, how are they repairing the building so that it is safe enough for kids to occupy it through 2030?

I disagree with you but to answer your question, there is (modest) funding allotted in the CIP for SSIMS renovations which MCPS has said would be sufficient for it to serve as a holding school.

Anonymous wrote:Structurally, in its present state, SSIMS is not safe to remain open. So if they're not closing it, how are they repairing the building so that it is safe enough for kids to occupy it through 2030?

Based on MCPS's own Facility Condition Index (FCI), it's basically middling. Plenty of schools with higher (meaning worse) scores that are not slated to be shut down. Taylor wants to close SSIMS to use it as a holding school. Not because its condition alone warranted closure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Structurally, in its present state, SSIMS is not safe to remain open. So if they're not closing it, how are they repairing the building so that it is safe enough for kids to occupy it through 2030?

And as a holding school after that. It's important to understand that MCPS is not closing the building in 2030. Other students will be attending it, just not the ones who attend it now. This is why this whole thing doesn't make sense. If it's not safe enough to be a neighborhood middle school, it is not safe enough to be a holding school. Period.

My take is that it IS safe enough to be a middle school but they are using the building condition as an excuse to create a holding school (something MCPS desperately wants). Otherwise, they would close it entirely.

No one is saying it doesn't need considerable work. But it's not like it should be condemned. Also, the Sligo Creek expansion was only completed in 1998-99. So technically that part would be on the timetable for "refreshing," but not rebuilding.

Anonymous wrote:Oops -- quoted area got messed up. Trying to say:

It's mainly SCES families advocating to save SSIMS, and they are not getting rezoned to another middle school.

I've been at these meetings and this is absolutely not true. It's Sligo Creek Families; current SSIMS and prospective SSIMS families (many of whom are not in the SCES catchment area); teachers and staff including from the French Immersion program; and folks who live in the immediate neighborhood who have concerns both about losing two neighborhood schools and the increase in bus traffic that would result by using the facility for up two schools simultaneously as holding schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Structurally, in its present state, SSIMS is not safe to remain open. So if they're not closing it, how are they repairing the building so that it is safe enough for kids to occupy it through 2030?

And as a holding school after that. It's important to understand that MCPS is not closing the building in 2030. Other students will be attending it, just not the ones who attend it now. This is why this whole thing doesn't make sense. If it's not safe enough to be a neighborhood middle school, it is not safe enough to be a holding school. Period.

My take is that it IS safe enough to be a middle school but they are using the building condition as an excuse to create a holding school (something MCPS desperately wants). Otherwise, they would close it entirely.

I believe their argument is that it is safe enough to have students and teachers there for a couple years at a time, but that there would be too much exposure to bad conditions (not sure what-- is there mold?) for the same teachers and staff to work there long-term.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also just noticing it would be a 4-year time frame that students would need to be moved offsite. I suppose if the Takoma & Eastern magnets were moved elsewhere that would create space? Plus Sligo is already a little under capacity so Forest Knolls could go there..

Not after they add Arcola to Sligo.

Yes, they would need to not do that, but there is enough space at Odessa Shannon.

But Arcola kids can’t go to OSMS because it’s Kennedy cluster and a different region than northwood. This is why tying their hands with these stupid regions is a mistake.

I'm not sure even MCPS thinks that the regions are hard boundaries. At least, over in the Crown area, doesn't the proposed Option H send current Region 5 students to what would be a Region 4 school (Wootton--> Crown)?

That would be a whole high school and its feeders switching regions (they would presumably make the Wootton feeders region 4 rather than 5.)

That's different from having an elementary school go to a middle school in one region and a high school in another. MCPS has been giving Flo Analytics specific regional boundary lines (you can see them on the interactive boundary maps) and telling them they have to send the schools and streets within each region to a MS and HS in that region.

I hope they change their mind on this and are willing to be more flexible, because it would indeed absolutely make sense to keep the SS/TP middle school assignments as-is for the next few years until some final decisions are made. But I'm worried they won't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Structurally, in its present state, SSIMS is not safe to remain open. So if they're not closing it, how are they repairing the building so that it is safe enough for kids to occupy it through 2030?

And as a holding school after that. It's important to understand that MCPS is not closing the building in 2030. Other students will be attending it, just not the ones who attend it now. This is why this whole thing doesn't make sense. If it's not safe enough to be a neighborhood middle school, it is not safe enough to be a holding school. Period.

My take is that it IS safe enough to be a middle school but they are using the building condition as an excuse to create a holding school (something MCPS desperately wants). Otherwise, they would close it entirely.

I agree with you. The only counterpoint to this that has been offered by those in favor of shutting down the school is that with it being a holding school, they will be able to have longer stretches where the building is not occupied, which will allow for more significant repairs than if it is an active neighborhood school building. But I'm not sure how much I believe that.

Anonymous wrote:Structurally, in its present state, SSIMS is not safe to remain open. So if they're not closing it, how are they repairing the building so that it is safe enough for kids to occupy it through 2030?

And as a holding school after that. It's important to understand that MCPS is not closing the building in 2030. Other students will be attending it, just not the ones who attend it now. This is why this whole thing doesn't make sense. If it's not safe enough to be a neighborhood middle school, it is not safe enough to be a holding school. Period.

My take is that it IS safe enough to be a middle school but they are using the building condition as an excuse to create a holding school (something MCPS desperately wants). Otherwise, they would close it entirely.

Structurally, in its present state, SSIMS is not safe to remain open. So if they're not closing it, how are they repairing the building so that it is safe enough for kids to occupy it through 2030?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also just noticing it would be a 4-year time frame that students would need to be moved offsite. I suppose if the Takoma & Eastern magnets were moved elsewhere that would create space? Plus Sligo is already a little under capacity so Forest Knolls could go there..

Not after they add Arcola to Sligo.

Yes, they would need to not do that, but there is enough space at Odessa Shannon.

But Arcola kids can’t go to OSMS because it’s Kennedy cluster and a different region than northwood. This is why tying their hands with these stupid regions is a mistake.

I'm not sure even MCPS thinks that the regions are hard boundaries. At least, over in the Crown area, doesn't the proposed Option H send current Region 5 students to what would be a Region 4 school (Wootton--> Crown)?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also just noticing it would be a 4-year time frame that students would need to be moved offsite. I suppose if the Takoma & Eastern magnets were moved elsewhere that would create space? Plus Sligo is already a little under capacity so Forest Knolls could go there..

Not after they add Arcola to Sligo.

Yes, they would need to not do that, but there is enough space at Odessa Shannon.

But Arcola kids can’t go to OSMS because it’s Kennedy cluster and a different region than northwood. This is why tying their hands with these stupid regions is a mistake.

None of these decisions should be made/money spent until the upcoming elementary boundary study takes place. Maybe it's SCES that becomes a holding school, but maybe enrollment is declining faster at another DCC elementary school and that one should be considered for closure. Either way, there is no reason to spend $70.5 million on a new SCES until that review takes place.