Anonymous
01/08/2026 15:39
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Rolling Terrace is being rezoned to TPMS in all four options that keep SSIMS open, right?
yes, you are exactly right. Options A through D all have Rolling Terrace articulating to TPMS.
Yes, and South Four Corners is rezoned from SSIMS to Eastern in all options, A-G.
I think that's intended to resolve Pine Crest's current split articulation, and have everyone articulate to Eastern.
What other middle school does Pine Crest articulate to in addition to Eastern MS?
Pinecrest splits between SSIMS and Eastern. This little corner of South Four Corners got split off from Forest Knolls in the 2020 elementary change up. Now we get bussed all the way down University Blvd to Montgomery Knolls for K-2 and to Pinecrest for 3-4. Instead of walking to Sligo Middle (under a mile) we’re bussed to SSIMS and now it will be even further to Eastern.
I think it stinks from a community standpoint to be carved off from the rest of our neighborhood and bussed out.
That's crazy that you wouldn't go to Sligo MS. That makes better sense than to go farther to eastern, while adding to the large school that Eastern is slated to become.
Anonymous
01/08/2026 15:17
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Rolling Terrace is being rezoned to TPMS in all four options that keep SSIMS open, right?
yes, you are exactly right. Options A through D all have Rolling Terrace articulating to TPMS.
Yes, and South Four Corners is rezoned from SSIMS to Eastern in all options, A-G.
I think that's intended to resolve Pine Crest's current split articulation, and have everyone articulate to Eastern.
What other middle school does Pine Crest articulate to in addition to Eastern MS?
Pinecrest splits between SSIMS and Eastern. This little corner of South Four Corners got split off from Forest Knolls in the 2020 elementary change up. Now we get bussed all the way down University Blvd to Montgomery Knolls for K-2 and to Pinecrest for 3-4. Instead of walking to Sligo Middle (under a mile) we’re bussed to SSIMS and now it will be even further to Eastern.
I think it stinks from a community standpoint to be carved off from the rest of our neighborhood and bussed out.
If they close SSIMS, all of Forest Knolls will get bussed to Eastern as well.
Anonymous
01/08/2026 11:53
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Rolling Terrace is being rezoned to TPMS in all four options that keep SSIMS open, right?
yes, you are exactly right. Options A through D all have Rolling Terrace articulating to TPMS.
Yes, and South Four Corners is rezoned from SSIMS to Eastern in all options, A-G.
I think that's intended to resolve Pine Crest's current split articulation, and have everyone articulate to Eastern.
What other middle school does Pine Crest articulate to in addition to Eastern MS?
Pinecrest splits between SSIMS and Eastern. This little corner of South Four Corners got split off from Forest Knolls in the 2020 elementary change up. Now we get bussed all the way down University Blvd to Montgomery Knolls for K-2 and to Pinecrest for 3-4. Instead of walking to Sligo Middle (under a mile) we’re bussed to SSIMS and now it will be even further to Eastern.
I think it stinks from a community standpoint to be carved off from the rest of our neighborhood and bussed out.
Anonymous
01/08/2026 11:00
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Rolling Terrace is being rezoned to TPMS in all four options that keep SSIMS open, right?
yes, you are exactly right. Options A through D all have Rolling Terrace articulating to TPMS.
Yes, and South Four Corners is rezoned from SSIMS to Eastern in all options, A-G.
I think that's intended to resolve Pine Crest's current split articulation, and have everyone articulate to Eastern.
What other middle school does Pine Crest articulate to in addition to Eastern MS?
Anonymous
01/08/2026 07:03
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Rolling Terrace is being rezoned to TPMS in all four options that keep SSIMS open, right?
yes, you are exactly right. Options A through D all have Rolling Terrace articulating to TPMS.
Yes, and South Four Corners is rezoned from SSIMS to Eastern in all options, A-G.
I think that's intended to resolve Pine Crest's current split articulation, and have everyone articulate to Eastern.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 23:13
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
I hate that this SS neighborhood is getting gutted of its schools.Taylor could leave the elementary school on site, rebuilt, and include a preschool, for which he can get Maryland State dollars to build. They could share outdoor space.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 22:10
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Rolling Terrace is being rezoned to TPMS in all four options that keep SSIMS open, right?
yes, you are exactly right. Options A through D all have Rolling Terrace articulating to TPMS.
Yes, and South Four Corners is rezoned from SSIMS to Eastern in all options, A-G.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 17:18
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree that MCPS will probably not use the results of the boundary survey as the basis for their decision on SSIMS. And the survey probably should have asked people to choose 1 of A-D and 1 of E-G, as they are separate issues. And of course HS boundaries and MS boundaries are different questions as well.
But I can't necessarily fault SSIMS supporters for advocating the choice of one of the options that keeps their school.
I voted for Option F and wrote in the comments that they shouldn't make any MS boundary changes until the SSIMS question is decided.
Haven't they decided to hold off on closing SSIMS, at least for now?
Yes, "for now." But it's really a punt, kicking the can down the road to 2027 as I understand it, rather than an affirmative decision to keep SSIMS open.
I think you are correct.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 16:39
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I agree that MCPS will probably not use the results of the boundary survey as the basis for their decision on SSIMS. And the survey probably should have asked people to choose 1 of A-D and 1 of E-G, as they are separate issues. And of course HS boundaries and MS boundaries are different questions as well.
But I can't necessarily fault SSIMS supporters for advocating the choice of one of the options that keeps their school.
I voted for Option F and wrote in the comments that they shouldn't make any MS boundary changes until the SSIMS question is decided.
Haven't they decided to hold off on closing SSIMS, at least for now?
Yes, "for now." But it's really a punt, kicking the can down the road to 2027 as I understand it, rather than an affirmative decision to keep SSIMS open.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 16:33
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:I agree that MCPS will probably not use the results of the boundary survey as the basis for their decision on SSIMS. And the survey probably should have asked people to choose 1 of A-D and 1 of E-G, as they are separate issues. And of course HS boundaries and MS boundaries are different questions as well.
But I can't necessarily fault SSIMS supporters for advocating the choice of one of the options that keeps their school.
I voted for Option F and wrote in the comments that they shouldn't make any MS boundary changes until the SSIMS question is decided.
Haven't they decided to hold off on closing SSIMS, at least for now?
Anonymous
01/07/2026 16:31
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
SSIMS will likely close (unless the superintendent leaves). The county council just wants the superintendent not to run over the Silver Spring community at 100 mph, when doing so at 50 mph will take the heat off the council.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 16:29
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Yes it is. Rolling Terrace is being rezoned to TPMS in all four options that keep SSIMS open, right?
RT should articulate to TPMS. TPMS is forecast to have capacity for this. Otherwise, Eastern would have to be even bigger more than MCPS is planning to build with 1,500 students.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 15:19
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
^ adding for clarity...all SS middle school boundaries
Anonymous
01/07/2026 15:16
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My question is: has MCPS said what you are saying here -- that if SSIMS stays open and they choose E, F, or G, they will stick with those 27-30 boundaries long-term? What if they vote in 2027 to not close SSIMS but they have already adopted E, F, or G. Would they then go back to A-D?
This is why this whole thing is so infuriating. I think people all have good intentions here and I don't think anyone is being "childish" as you accuse. I think there is genuine confusion that MCPS needs to clear up on how this will all play out considering the decision of whether to close SSIMS has been proposed.
Yes, I absolutely agree that MCPS is handling this wrong and it's mainly their fault. But in the absence of clear information, there is much less reason to conclude "picking options E-G will result in SSIMS closing" than "picking options E-G will not force SSIMS to close since that depends on a Board vote which won't happen until at least 2027," and I would think that is fairly self-evident, but I guess not?
(And if they don't close SSIMS, why would they need to go back to A-D? They would presumably just keep kids at the same middle schools they were at from 2027-2030 under options E-G, which is basically the same schools they're at now. Or if they really feel like they need to change things, they can come up with new Silver Spring middle school assignments alongside the countywide elementary school boundary study they're doing in 2026-2027. But it's not like options A-D are the only options that could work with SSIMS being open.)
Because the entire purpose of the boundary study was to change boundaries! Those options were the result of millions of dollars of research to balance things like walkability, demographics, etc. I'm not saying those options were perfect, but to say all SS boundaries should not be changed because MCPS chose an absolutely terrible time to suggest closing a school that was in the midst of a large boundary study is such a waste of taxpayer money and resources.
Anonymous
01/07/2026 15:02
Subject: SSIMS activists spreading misinformation about boundary options
Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why they can't just choose the 27-30 Options E-G middle school boundaries regardless, and then choose among A-G for high school boundaries.
Then in 2027 or 2028, depending on SSIMS decision, choose middle school boundaries.
Adding to clarify, that in 2027 or 2028, the MS boundaries for 2030 forward could be decided on. If they'd like to make the big changes proposed in Options A-D because they work best with the HS boundaries, at least they would have by that time committed to keeping the school open.