Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a very valid proposal and I wish MCPS would have had the stones to propose it themselves. However it is tone deaf for one school community to propose a boundary change impacting a different school community and not consulting them.

They sort of did with all of their 9 or so options over the year. It just didn't get positive feedback during the surveys and Taylor did what he believed was best for MCPS. It's his fiduciary duty after all.

Agree the petitioners should have consulted the various communities impacted but went on their own bc they don't care about anything but property value.

It is not the petitioners’ job to conduct their own study. It is their right to present a concern or feedback on the options. Any other community can provide their own feedback or write their own petitions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With WJ basically losing 1/2 their student population, they will also lose 1/2 the staffing and 1/2 the course offerings. Its not going to be the same school.

Blah blah blah. This guy says this constantly over the last year. It’ll still be better than fashion design academy

What do you think is going to happen?

Woodward is a government run start up. Takes a long time for any start up to work out kinks. Now add govt and it’ll be way longer. Mix in the arts piece. It’ll be less desirable than WJ. Really farmland should be pushing for the better magnet and not the neighborhood switches. It’s a super boundary with the regions

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a very valid proposal and I wish MCPS would have had the stones to propose it themselves. However it is tone deaf for one school community to propose a boundary change impacting a different school community and not consulting them.

They sort of did with all of their 9 or so options over the year. It just didn't get positive feedback during the surveys and Taylor did what he believed was best for MCPS. It's his fiduciary duty after all.

Agree the petitioners should have consulted the various communities impacted but went on their own bc they don't care about anything but property value.

It is not the petitioners’ job to conduct their own study. It is their right to present a concern or feedback on the options. Any other community can provide their own feedback or write their own petitions.

They don't have to conduct their own study. It just looks bad to propose moving someone else out of their high school.

Which is not what the proposal is about. VM and WW are being moved out of their current school one way or the other.

But Farmland and Luxmanor want them moved out of *Farmland and Luxmanor's* new high school.

'Moving out' of the school that has yet to open and where no WW or VM student ever set foot is not moving out in a real sense.

omg, these people.

Farmland and Luxmanor (or really, some people from) are campaigning to kick VM and WW out of the proposed new high school that Farmland and Luxmanor will attend. Rather than advocating for themselves, as in, "we don't want to change schools," they are effectively saying "we'll change schools, but we don't want it to be with them. Move them, and we'll be fine."

Which is... rude at best. I don't know what kind of definition of moving out you need in order to make it not rude. They are advocating for another school to change boundaries, so that their kids will not have to attend school with them.

Under all options, recommendations, proposals, ..., some schools are being moved to some other schools. And nobody is calling it being 'kicked out'. Under the Taylor recommendation, VM is being 'kicked out' of Wheaton, Farmland is being 'kicked out' of WJ, Wheaton Woods is being 'kicked out' of Wheaton, ... The proposal simply calls for more balancing kicking to take place.

What do you find confusing?

It’s different when it is the community (or a few vocal individuals of the community) saying that they don’t want you at the same school as them.

Can you share a reference to where you are getting this from?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's a very valid proposal and I wish MCPS would have had the stones to propose it themselves. However it is tone deaf for one school community to propose a boundary change impacting a different school community and not consulting them.

They sort of did with all of their 9 or so options over the year. It just didn't get positive feedback during the surveys and Taylor did what he believed was best for MCPS. It's his fiduciary duty after all.

Agree the petitioners should have consulted the various communities impacted but went on their own bc they don't care about anything but property value.

It is not the petitioners’ job to conduct their own study. It is their right to present a concern or feedback on the options. Any other community can provide their own feedback or write their own petitions.

They don't have to conduct their own study. It just looks bad to propose moving someone else out of their high school.

Which is not what the proposal is about. VM and WW are being moved out of their current school one way or the other.

But Farmland and Luxmanor want them moved out of *Farmland and Luxmanor's* new high school.

'Moving out' of the school that has yet to open and where no WW or VM student ever set foot is not moving out in a real sense.

omg, these people.

Farmland and Luxmanor (or really, some people from) are campaigning to kick VM and WW out of the proposed new high school that Farmland and Luxmanor will attend. Rather than advocating for themselves, as in, "we don't want to change schools," they are effectively saying "we'll change schools, but we don't want it to be with them. Move them, and we'll be fine."

Which is... rude at best. I don't know what kind of definition of moving out you need in order to make it not rude. They are advocating for another school to change boundaries, so that their kids will not have to attend school with them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe Farmland and Luxmanor would be more successful if they proposed removing themselves from Woodward.

You may be onto something. They get moved to WJ and, to solve Woodward underutilization and WJ overcrowding, all three NBMS elementary schools get moved to Woodward.

Sarcasm aside, then you’re back to displacing other populations against their wishes to get the student body that matches your expectations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VM parents strongly support Taylor's plan. We want Woodward, not WJ.

No, you support Taylor's plan. And that is fine. But stop pretending that you speak for the entire VM community.

The opinions in the VM parent Whatsapp group are largely unanimous. Are you a current VM parent?

DP

I don't question that what you are saying about sentiment on WhatsApp is true. But I find it mind-boggling that there would be such a strong consensus not to select a school that will almost certainly have better class offering, better teacher and overall better academic reputation. Not to mention that Woodward will be stuck with the art magnet, additionally diverting resources from things that matter.

I’m a VM parents and I agree with this. Granted I’m new (kid will be in K next year). I strongly support going to WJ if we can. Stronger school, barely different distance, less utilization, more reasonable farms rates. Very confused by the backlash here. I don’t feel used at all or a token poor person. I simply want what’s best for my kids

Then you’re not a VM parent now and likely a Farmland parent. Or if you are you want to be able to afford a better home addition.
I’m a VM parent and we want Woodward for the many reasons above.

So sick of the assumptions!! God forbid someone disagrees with you. I LIVE in holiday park. I am a VM parent. I don’t have millions of dollars for a home addition what is this nonsense?! These two neighboring schools should be very similar to each other given they are RIGHT next to each other and this proposal along with the class offerings/programs ensures they won’t be

Yes you want the increase in home equity that comes with WJ. Then you can do your addition.

Right next to each other…Similar distance as BCC and Whitman. Yet differences exist

The Farmland group isn’t arguing programs. Seems like they’re OK with arts which is where they should focus effort. Everyone other region spreads around the arts. And some even put STEM and IB in desirable locations. Not our region.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VM parents strongly support Taylor's plan. We want Woodward, not WJ.

No, you support Taylor's plan. And that is fine. But stop pretending that you speak for the entire VM community.

The opinions in the VM parent Whatsapp group are largely unanimous. Are you a current VM parent?

DP

I don't question that what you are saying about sentiment on WhatsApp is true. But I find it mind-boggling that there would be such a strong consensus not to select a school that will almost certainly have better class offering, better teacher and overall better academic reputation. Not to mention that Woodward will be stuck with the art magnet, additionally diverting resources from things that matter.

I’m a VM parents and I agree with this. Granted I’m new (kid will be in K next year). I strongly support going to WJ if we can. Stronger school, barely different distance, less utilization, more reasonable farms rates. Very confused by the backlash here. I don’t feel used at all or a token poor person. I simply want what’s best for my kids

Then you’re not a VM parent now and likely a Farmland parent. Or if you are you want to be able to afford a better home addition.
I’m a VM parent and we want Woodward for the many reasons above.

So sick of the assumptions!! God forbid someone disagrees with you. I LIVE in holiday park. I am a VM parent. I don’t have millions of dollars for a home addition what is this nonsense?! These two neighboring schools should be very similar to each other given they are RIGHT next to each other and this proposal along with the class offerings/programs ensures they won’t be

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hope they push for a better magnet. In parallel to this noise or however they want to do it. That will attract top talent from the region.

We are zoned for WJ. I would gladly go to Woodward if it wasn't slated to be an arts school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems a proposal to shift back to the original option B may go further. That option was prepared and presented in detail and got positive feedback from the community.

Agree.

Luxmanor realtor is for it. She can say we need to send WW back to Wheaton because they increase FARMS too much at Woodward for her liking. But it fixes her utilization issue by making it underutilized even more than 9% to 27%. Clearly they have room for WW but don’t want them.

She outlines a number of points related to utilization. Which do you think are false/misstated?

Anonymous wrote:WJ PTA cluster reps now support original Option B per message that went out. VM to stay at Woodward.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems a proposal to shift back to the original option B may go further. That option was prepared and presented in detail and got positive feedback from the community.

Going back to option B means sending WW back to overcrowded Wheaton, right? And reversing a bunch of un-related changes in Silver Spring? That doesn't make any sense. Why would they propose that rather than just switching the boundaries between WJ and Woodward?

Easiest is to simply swap ES area in WJ and Woodward.

Farmland into Wheaton or Kennedy would have a greater balancing effect on FARMs. And they can show just how genuine their sentiments are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems a proposal to shift back to the original option B may go further. That option was prepared and presented in detail and got positive feedback from the community.

Agree.

Luxmanor realtor is for it. She can say we need to send WW back to Wheaton because they increase FARMS too much at Woodward for her liking. But it fixes her utilization issue by making it underutilized even more than 9% to 27%. Clearly they have room for WW but don’t want them.

And WJ realtor is against it as it will bump WJ FARMS by 1.6%.

WJ FARMS shold not increase even by 1-2 % at any cost.

+1

Please keep suggested option. It's best for housing price in WJ. Also, it will keep poor kids away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again…Boundary changes happen all the time. Families do not get to choose their schools. The intense lack of flexibility and coping skills among the outspoken and entitled parents on this thread is staggering. Use your energy for good. The world needs your outrage but not for school boundary changes.

Bad take. People literally are entitled to have an opinion

Anonymous wrote:Again…Boundary changes happen all the time. Families do not get to choose their schools. The intense lack of flexibility and coping skills among the outspoken and entitled parents on this thread is staggering. Use your energy for good. The world needs your outrage but not for school boundary changes.