Anonymous wrote:Ritchie Park will never turn it around until the principal is gone. She isn’t terrible, but she isn’t great, and just creates a blah environment. The school counselor needs to go too.

The new VP is good, but we need fresh blood that can make the school have some spirit, and encourage less changeover. I am jealous of the families moving. That new school will be great.

The school counselor is awful.

Ritchie Park will never turn it around until the principal is gone. She isn’t terrible, but she isn’t great, and just creates a blah environment. The school counselor needs to go too.

The new VP is good, but we need fresh blood that can make the school have some spirit, and encourage less changeover. I am jealous of the families moving. That new school will be great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:College Gardens could just join Gaithersburg HS cluster entirely. It would be much smaller without King Farm and they would likely have have to redistrict the cluster again otherwise.

Gaithersburg High and the feeder middle schools are all over capacity. There is zero chance that all of King Farm would be be forced to go there. More likely is that they are redistricted to the new Crown High School.

The plan is to even the SES at ALL high schools looking to get rezoned. All of Crown, Gaithersburg, RM, Wootton, Seneca Valley, QO, Northeastern, Clarksburg, etc....

Also Gaithersburg is about 60 kids over capacity at a 2400 kid school. Hardly over capacity. RM is much more over. The zones will trickle down by SES levels. Otherwise Crown, Wootton, RM, QO will still be good high schools while Gaithersburg remains a shit show. The board will never let that happen and King Farm is a mile closer to Gaithersburg High. I will be watching with popcorn because the RM side of King Farm is going to lose their minds. And yes, CG could all move to Gaithersburg if an entire ES is moved to Crown High school. Definitely possible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rustin PTA elections:

President - 2 candidates
VP Programs - 2 candidates
VP Membership - 3 candidates
VP Communication - 3 candidates
VP Fundraising - 2 candidates; 1 withdrew just before the vote to run uncontested in another position
Treasurer - 1 candidate
Secretary - 1 candidate
Delegate - 2 positions, 2 candidates

This is what engaged parent leadership looks like.

Wow! What a great start! That’s amazing.

My understanding is that most of the Beall PTA leadership was shifted to Rustin.

Your understanding is totally wrong. Only one Beall PTA board member is selected for Rustin PTA board position. As far as I know, that person is the only one with PTA board experience among everyone selected for Rustin. Not having experience can be good and bad both, but your understanding is way off target. Rustin board has very little experience and ride will be a bumpy one. Anyway I couldn't attend the vote, but happy to hear that multiple parents ran for various positions. That's not the norm in most PTA's election so posters shouldn't use this example to pick on RP PTA.

Are you saying that Rustin's entire board has only one board member with previous experience? There were 30 PTA board members in Beall, RP and CG. I am sure many of them are going to Rustin. How come only 1 out of 30 is in Rustin board? I was present during voting, but this information was not shared before the vote.

I liked the on floor nominations, but ideal would have been to have a background information of every single person interested in position distributed to members in advance. Then we could have made informed decision.

I have an older child at CGES and only recognize one of the CGES names. That person has volunteered with the school before and she'll be a wonderful PTA Board member for Rustin. I'm sure other CGES parents will also do a great job on the Rustin board, but don't recognize the names as having volunteered. Maybe they volunteered with the younger grades and I just don't know about it.

Anonymous wrote:all hell is gonna break loose when they have to rezone areas to gaithersburg high school. just the mention of that high school would be enough to cause a mass exodus of residents

Why you don’t like going to a school where 18yr old freshman are getting arrested for murder, right in School campus? What about the MS13 fights? Oh wait, beating up teachers too? It is a glorious school.

Anonymous wrote:This thread has gotten crazy off topic.

don't they all.

This thread has gotten crazy off topic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rustin PTA elections:

President - 2 candidates
VP Programs - 2 candidates
VP Membership - 3 candidates
VP Communication - 3 candidates
VP Fundraising - 2 candidates; 1 withdrew just before the vote to run uncontested in another position
Treasurer - 1 candidate
Secretary - 1 candidate
Delegate - 2 positions, 2 candidates

This is what engaged parent leadership looks like.

Wow! What a great start! That’s amazing.

My understanding is that most of the Beall PTA leadership was shifted to Rustin.

Your understanding is totally wrong. Only one Beall PTA board member is selected for Rustin PTA board position. As far as I know, that person is the only one with PTA board experience among everyone selected for Rustin. Not having experience can be good and bad both, but your understanding is way off target. Rustin board has very little experience and ride will be a bumpy one. Anyway I couldn't attend the vote, but happy to hear that multiple parents ran for various positions. That's not the norm in most PTA's election so posters shouldn't use this example to pick on RP PTA.

That info was relayed to Woodley Gardens families encouraging them to run for Beall PTA positions. Maybe it was exaggerated.

In Rustin, 4 board members are from CG and 4 are from Beall and 1 from RP. That's what I remember. Also, based on above posts, only one Beall PTA board member is in Rustin Board.

WG families should surely run for Beall PTA positions otherwise it starts looking like some friends and neighbors coming together and make it a clique.

Based on the maps, it makes sense that more Beall parents would be on the PTA. Only two small RP zones now are zoned for Rustin, whereas Rustin will have larger areas from Beall. It almost looks like Beall was split 50/50 per the map.

As for former CG parents in the PTA, they are part of CI, and my guess is that such parents are heavily invested/involved in their kids's schools (which is a good thing).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rustin PTA elections:

President - 2 candidates
VP Programs - 2 candidates
VP Membership - 3 candidates
VP Communication - 3 candidates
VP Fundraising - 2 candidates; 1 withdrew just before the vote to run uncontested in another position
Treasurer - 1 candidate
Secretary - 1 candidate
Delegate - 2 positions, 2 candidates

This is what engaged parent leadership looks like.

Wow! What a great start! That’s amazing.

My understanding is that most of the Beall PTA leadership was shifted to Rustin.

Your understanding is totally wrong. Only one Beall PTA board member is selected for Rustin PTA board position. As far as I know, that person is the only one with PTA board experience among everyone selected for Rustin. Not having experience can be good and bad both, but your understanding is way off target. Rustin board has very little experience and ride will be a bumpy one. Anyway I couldn't attend the vote, but happy to hear that multiple parents ran for various positions. That's not the norm in most PTA's election so posters shouldn't use this example to pick on RP PTA.

That info was relayed to Woodley Gardens families encouraging them to run for Beall PTA positions. Maybe it was exaggerated.

In Rustin, 4 board members are from CG and 4 are from Beall and 1 from RP. That's what I remember. Also, based on above posts, only one Beall PTA board member is in Rustin Board.

WG families should surely run for Beall PTA positions otherwise it starts looking like some friends and neighbors coming together and make it a clique.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rustin PTA elections:

President - 2 candidates
VP Programs - 2 candidates
VP Membership - 3 candidates
VP Communication - 3 candidates
VP Fundraising - 2 candidates; 1 withdrew just before the vote to run uncontested in another position
Treasurer - 1 candidate
Secretary - 1 candidate
Delegate - 2 positions, 2 candidates

This is what engaged parent leadership looks like.

Wow! What a great start! That’s amazing.

My understanding is that most of the Beall PTA leadership was shifted to Rustin.

Your understanding is totally wrong. Only one Beall PTA board member is selected for Rustin PTA board position. As far as I know, that person is the only one with PTA board experience among everyone selected for Rustin. Not having experience can be good and bad both, but your understanding is way off target. Rustin board has very little experience and ride will be a bumpy one. Anyway I couldn't attend the vote, but happy to hear that multiple parents ran for various positions. That's not the norm in most PTA's election so posters shouldn't use this example to pick on RP PTA.

Are you saying that Rustin's entire board has only one board member with previous experience? There were 30 PTA board members in Beall, RP and CG. I am sure many of them are going to Rustin. How come only 1 out of 30 is in Rustin board? I was present during voting, but this information was not shared before the vote.

I liked the on floor nominations, but ideal would have been to have a background information of every single person interested in position distributed to members in advance. Then we could have made informed decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rustin PTA elections:

President - 2 candidates
VP Programs - 2 candidates
VP Membership - 3 candidates
VP Communication - 3 candidates
VP Fundraising - 2 candidates; 1 withdrew just before the vote to run uncontested in another position
Treasurer - 1 candidate
Secretary - 1 candidate
Delegate - 2 positions, 2 candidates

This is what engaged parent leadership looks like.

Wow! What a great start! That’s amazing.

My understanding is that most of the Beall PTA leadership was shifted to Rustin.

Your understanding is totally wrong. Only one Beall PTA board member is selected for Rustin PTA board position. As far as I know, that person is the only one with PTA board experience among everyone selected for Rustin. Not having experience can be good and bad both, but your understanding is way off target. Rustin board has very little experience and ride will be a bumpy one. Anyway I couldn't attend the vote, but happy to hear that multiple parents ran for various positions. That's not the norm in most PTA's election so posters shouldn't use this example to pick on RP PTA.

That info was relayed to Woodley Gardens families encouraging them to run for Beall PTA positions. Maybe it was exaggerated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rustin PTA elections:

President - 2 candidates
VP Programs - 2 candidates
VP Membership - 3 candidates
VP Communication - 3 candidates
VP Fundraising - 2 candidates; 1 withdrew just before the vote to run uncontested in another position
Treasurer - 1 candidate
Secretary - 1 candidate
Delegate - 2 positions, 2 candidates

This is what engaged parent leadership looks like.

Wow! What a great start! That’s amazing.

My understanding is that most of the Beall PTA leadership was shifted to Rustin.

Your understanding is totally wrong. Only one Beall PTA board member is selected for Rustin PTA board position. As far as I know, that person is the only one with PTA board experience among everyone selected for Rustin. Not having experience can be good and bad both, but your understanding is way off target. Rustin board has very little experience and ride will be a bumpy one. Anyway I couldn't attend the vote, but happy to hear that multiple parents ran for various positions. That's not the norm in most PTA's election so posters shouldn't use this example to pick on RP PTA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ritchie Park is frequently a target of complaints on this board. Parents at Beall and College Gardens are much more engaged.

Just look at PTA elections at Rustin. Most positions contested with parents currently at Beall and CG running. Only one current RP parent ran. RP PTA has had to beg and beg for 2 years to get hardly anyone to run. Its a sad state of affairs at RP, and OP would be better off at any other cluster school.

So, did you ever volunteer?

Exactly, if you find RP PTA not effective then get involve, contribute and make some difference. Simply complaining about it is not going to fix anything. Also, everyone should remember that PTA is simply parents volunteering their time. Everything won't be perfect unless people get involve.

I find it hard to believe that multiple positions were contested at Rustin. Is there an official transcript of this? I would like to see that.

+1 I don't understand the people who complain about not enough volunteers but they themselves don't volunteer.

I have never served in the PTA, but appreciate all the people who do it. I have volunteered at school functions/class/lunch.

I am in Board in PTA outside of RM cluster, I gets frustrated when people complain about how things can be done better, but not willing to get involved to make it better. Not everyone has to run for board positions, but like you did , get involved in school functions/class/lunch etc. Involvement at all levels helps to have a vibrant community and kids benefit from that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ritchie Park is frequently a target of complaints on this board. Parents at Beall and College Gardens are much more engaged.

Just look at PTA elections at Rustin. Most positions contested with parents currently at Beall and CG running. Only one current RP parent ran. RP PTA has had to beg and beg for 2 years to get hardly anyone to run. Its a sad state of affairs at RP, and OP would be better off at any other cluster school.

So, did you ever volunteer?

Exactly, if you find RP PTA not effective then get involve, contribute and make some difference. Simply complaining about it is not going to fix anything. Also, everyone should remember that PTA is simply parents volunteering their time. Everything won't be perfect unless people get involve.

I find it hard to believe that multiple positions were contested at Rustin. Is there an official transcript of this? I would like to see that.

+1 I don't understand the people who complain about not enough volunteers but they themselves don't volunteer.

I have never served in the PTA, but appreciate all the people who do it. I have volunteered at school functions/class/lunch.