Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, I know the problem. Do you want to solve it by building elementary schools with a capacity of 800 students?

No, but you can increase capacity in some to relieve others.

Anonymous wrote:Unfortunately, I think some of the projections are still wishful thinking. For example, Takoma Park elementary now has 650 students and capacity for 584. If you look at MCPS projections, they magically go back down to 577 by 2019, thereby there is no need to address overcrowding. My guess is the numbers will actually keep going up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But this is precisely the problem. Granted, if there is flooding issues or mold or things are collapsing, then OK. But to not consider capacity is ridiculous. And it's not like the overcrowded schools are in shiny new buildings. Some merely had additions put on them that did little to ease the overcrowding. But because it was done "recently" that means they go to the back of the line? Ultimately, the decision should be based on how is the environment affecting the quality of learning. IMHO, overcrowding affects learning more negatively than a building that's a little long in the tooth, so to speak.

The line is not based on original age or recency of the last expansion/modernization. That's why Seneca Valley can be 20 years newer than Poolesville and get a higher priority FACT score. Again, I highly recommend reading the links, as they explain exactly how the decisions are made.

I did read and it sounds nice in theory. But practically speaking it's flawed. This is just my opinion based on what I've seen and read about around the county. Based on this, I would think the mold issue at Rolling Terrace would move them to the top of the list. Or the flooding issue at Wheaton Woods would make them a priority. But it hasn't. And meanwhile, we're just supposed to tell kids at the overcrowded Richard Montgomery elementary schools, sorry, we can't build that 5th elementary school because it's not cost efficient but we can build at other places that are under capacity. So do you see my problem with the decision making process?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fine. If that's the case then build a bigger school and redistrict to relive pressure in an overcrowded cluster. I know at least in the case of Wayside that is NOT happening. They're building a smaller school since enrollment is projected to remain low.

671 now vs. 641 after renovation. Not a big difference, in my opinion. And how big do you think an elementary school should be? Around 650 seems to be the target for MCPS, and that already seems like a big elementary school to me.

Now you know the problem. There are a lot of overcrowded schools with enrollment approaching 800 in facilities made for 500-600.

Yes, I know the problem. Do you want to solve it by building elementary schools with a capacity of 800 students?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But this is precisely the problem. Granted, if there is flooding issues or mold or things are collapsing, then OK. But to not consider capacity is ridiculous. And it's not like the overcrowded schools are in shiny new buildings. Some merely had additions put on them that did little to ease the overcrowding. But because it was done "recently" that means they go to the back of the line? Ultimately, the decision should be based on how is the environment affecting the quality of learning. IMHO, overcrowding affects learning more negatively than a building that's a little long in the tooth, so to speak.

The line is not based on original age or recency of the last expansion/modernization. That's why Seneca Valley can be 20 years newer than Poolesville and get a higher priority FACT score. Again, I highly recommend reading the links, as they explain exactly how the decisions are made.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fine. If that's the case then build a bigger school and redistrict to relive pressure in an overcrowded cluster. I know at least in the case of Wayside that is NOT happening. They're building a smaller school since enrollment is projected to remain low.

671 now vs. 641 after renovation. Not a big difference, in my opinion. And how big do you think an elementary school should be? Around 650 seems to be the target for MCPS, and that already seems like a big elementary school to me.

Now you know the problem. There are a lot of overcrowded schools with enrollment approaching 800 in facilities made for 500-600.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fine. If that's the case then build a bigger school and redistrict to relive pressure in an overcrowded cluster. I know at least in the case of Wayside that is NOT happening. They're building a smaller school since enrollment is projected to remain low.

671 now vs. 641 after renovation. Not a big difference, in my opinion. And how big do you think an elementary school should be? Around 650 seems to be the target for MCPS, and that already seems like a big elementary school to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Fine. If that's the case then build a bigger school and redistrict to relive pressure in an overcrowded cluster. I know at least in the case of Wayside that is NOT happening. They're building a smaller school since enrollment is projected to remain low.

Anonymous wrote:But this is precisely the problem. Granted, if there is flooding issues or mold or things are collapsing, then OK. But to not consider capacity is ridiculous. And it's not like the overcrowded schools are in shiny new buildings. Some merely had additions put on them that did little to ease the overcrowding. But because it was done "recently" that means they go to the back of the line? Ultimately, the decision should be based on how is the environment affecting the quality of learning. IMHO, overcrowding affects learning more negatively than a building that's a little long in the tooth, so to speak.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But this is precisely the problem. Granted, if there is flooding issues or mold or things are collapsing, then OK. But to not consider capacity is ridiculous. And it's not like the overcrowded schools are in shiny new buildings. Some merely had additions put on them that did little to ease the overcrowding. But because it was done "recently" that means they go to the back of the line? Ultimately, the decision should be based on how is the environment affecting the quality of learning. IMHO, overcrowding affects learning more negatively than a building that's a little long in the tooth, so to speak.

It should also be based on how much money are they going to have to spend later if they don't fix things up and maintain them now. Deferred maintenance gets really expensive -- just look at Metro -- and the bill always comes due, sooner or later. It's not an effective way to spend a capital improvement budget.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know how much is costs to do redistricting? I know that the new RM ES #5 is going to cost $35 million (or would have several years ago) if/when it finally gets built. Curious about the cost/benefit analysis between building a new building to relieve overcrowding vs. redistricting to relieve overcrowding.

Anonymous wrote:

But this is precisely the problem. Granted, if there is flooding issues or mold or things are collapsing, then OK. But to not consider capacity is ridiculous. And it's not like the overcrowded schools are in shiny new buildings. Some merely had additions put on them that did little to ease the overcrowding. But because it was done "recently" that means they go to the back of the line? Ultimately, the decision should be based on how is the environment affecting the quality of learning. IMHO, overcrowding affects learning more negatively than a building that's a little long in the tooth, so to speak.

Anonymous wrote:

But not from a quality of education POV. Which trumps? Why can't they look at both the facilities condition as well as other factors? Not saying if a building is falling apart and has mold, etc.. it shouldn't be renovated. But they should really look at the current state of the building rather than just whether it was ever renovated or not. If it still works fine, no structural issues, why renovate it if there are more pressing issues? Admittedly, I have no idea whether those schools were in dire conditions, but do they ever inspect the buildings before making these decisions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP - this is *exactly* what I am referring to. It makes no sense to me why they don't take this area and redistrict to somewhere closer where it's under capacity. And obviously, there's no classism or racism about this since, as you noted, that is an expensive area, more so than some Wootton neighborhoods.

They are currently building a 5th elementary school in the RM cluster, so the ES level overcrowding is already being dealt with. Similarly, JW MS has an addition being built. The JH Science Center property development will also add housing in this general area over time, which might be allocated to Wootton. Due to all of the foregoing, I doubt Fallsgrove will be redistricted, though the neighborhood is in fact closer to Lakewood, Frost & Wootton.

The last I heard at the RP PTA meeting in May was that funding for building the new elementary school did not get approved - it is on hold indefinitely with no guarantee it will ever get built.

Not to sound like a broken record but to reiterate, the Board of Education recommended that the 5th elementary school in this cluster be built by 2015, so construction would have had to begun by 2013. What happened was that the County Council voted to delay the funding for construction until 2015 with completion by 2017. Meanwhile, they approved funding for BFES, Wayside, Candlewood and possibly others (these are the only three I've seen) even though these were under enrolled.

Someone also said that decisions about school construction are made years in advance. That's true. But if the projections on population are wrong---and they are wrong and that can be seen years in advance---then there should be some flexibility to address that. Some may disagree, but I don't think a county that believes its schools are the best in the nation should have campuses that resemble a trailer park more than a school playground.

The CIPs are available to review in archive form (http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/planning/cipmaster.aspx). The ES school projects you mention have always been ahead of RM ES#5 in the queue set forth in the published CIP. The analysis regarding modernization has essentially nothing to do with capacity. It's an analysis of the facility itself, which is why a HS like Poolesville can be undercapacity yet high on the list for modernization. Similarly, Dufief and Cold Spring in the Wootton cluster are both undercapacity, but they'll each be getting new facilities in a few years.