Students/Parents' Voices and Came up with a Redistricting Plan with Minimal Disruption and Less Transportation Costs
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Kathleen V. Hanks From: Baoge Ying <baogeying@hotmail. com> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 11:56 PM To: Hcpss Redistricting; Mavis Ellis; Kirsten Coombs; Vicky Cutroneo; Christina Delmont- Small; Jennifer Mallo; Sabina Taj; Chao Wu; Kathleen V. Hanks Subject: [External] Support Dr. Wu's Redistricting Plan (Attendance area adjustment Work session 2) Dear Board of Education members, I strongly support Dr. Chao Wu's plan. His plan will only move 3000 students, which is less than half of the Superintendent's Redistricting proposal. I believe that Dr. Wu has listened to the students/parents' voices and came up with a redistricting plan with minimal disruption and less transportation costs. In the meanwhile, his plan will also'reach the main goal of resolving school overcapacity. Best Regards, Baoge Ying Polygon 3176 Kathleen V. Hanks From: Bernard Meyer <internautbhm@verizon. net> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 11:53 PM To: Hcpss Redistricting Subject: [External] Overpopulation in Howard County Schools-one more time Importance: High Dear Howard County School Board, Even though I sent in the following weeks ago, I do not see said solutions to the school overpopulation mentioned in any ofthe reviews ofthe current meetings on the subject. So one more time: Go to on-line teaching and/or closed-circuit/PBS TVteaching in the student's home or in a ^^. l'h.???-t'o. me.,withParental monitoring using PCsand7or large screen TVs? Hint: Universityof Phoenix,jhereby reducing the student population in brickschools and the need to build newones e.. the best English teacher in Howard County and/or Maryland and/orthe USA"preps~cTosed^circuit~ lessonsand tests. Testingwould bedone by on-line software testing oronce a monthtests atthe ^ULrentlwal. school_s:.. Andyes' thi.s-would involve lettin9 9° manyofthe current teachers'(Engiish, c' .F-o.reig-n Lan£luag??:social studies eto- whsre hands-on learning is not required)" fh'e' savingsjo taxpayers would be huge. Technology marches on. e. g. 50, 000 translators lost their iobs due to Google Translate. In the same vein as above, use teaching software commercially available for in-home or n.eighborhoodh, ometeachlng sites- LaPtoPS. tablets, PCS, smart-phoneoMarge screen monitors for would be Provided or subsidized by tax-payer"funds^ . fn^sting'. _ Tf1 es^ "Note:As"per" m.ygrandson' softwareis alreadybeing used in biologyclasses to simulate'experimentswith live' since these are no longer allowed in Howard'County schools. My grandson also noted'that even some Phys. Ed. classes are now using education software. the social needsof students be can easily achieved via sports programs, .TendmgAO-, /or'sch001 clubs m*uis!c/band. s/orches. t.ras, and. at_the current schools or fromrvarous organizations like ' andYM/WCA teams or HowardCounty Library/Parks and Recreation learning'groups"" .And^why_not. use-Howard county Nbrarissand other Countyfacilities (e. g.volunteer fired de,p.a.rt.n,!ents-t.heRobinson Naturecenter'the col"mbiaAssociation'faci?ities)~manyof'them brand newwith plenty of space for classrooms and paid for in full or partially by my taxes???' B. H. Meyer, Elkridge, MD Kathleen V. Hanks From: Tammy Baskaran <tambarrick@yahoo. com> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 11:52 PM To: Mavis Ellis; Sabina Taj; Christina Delmont-Small; Jennifer Malta; Kirsten Coombs; Vicky Cutroneo; Chao Wu; Hcpss Redistricting Subject: [External] Please keep 176, 3176 together (River Hill) Dear Board Members, I live in polygon #176 Walnut Creek, have 3 children, and would like to express my support of Dr. Wu's proposed plan, and strong opposition ofMs. Mallo's plan. After hearing Ms. Mallo and Dr. Wupresent their plans, Dr. Wu's plan is far more efficient for numerous reasons. Dr. Wu focuses on moving less students out of their schools, keeping costs lower, maintaining smaller feeds, balancing school capacity, and keeping communities together. This is less disruptive and much more logical. Alternatively, Ms. Mallo's plan violates Policy 6010, unnecessarily moves thousands more students, moves students out ofunder-capacity schools to other under-capacity schools, and is much more costly on the already strained budget. Also in her plan, it does not make sense to send part of our community #176 to Wilde Lake and send #3176 to River Hill. Our Walnut Creek/Grove #176/#3176 community shouldbe kept together as part of Walnut Creek is in Walnut Grove and only 1. 4 miles from River Hill. There is no logical reason to send polygon #176 past under-capacity River Hill to Wilde Lake. Let's "keep our children at the center of all decision making" as the Board ofEd site states. Thank you. Tammy Baskaran Polygon#176 Kathleen V. Hanks From: Meenu Yahoo <meenu111suri@yahoo. com> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2019 11:40 PM To: Mavis Ellis; Sabina Taj; Christina Delmont-Small; Jennifer Mallo; Kirsten Coombs; Vicky Cutroneo; Chao Wu; hlcpss Redistricting; BoE Email Subject: [External] Re: High School Re-districting Dear BOEs I have studied all 3 proposed redistrictingplans in detail. We should really consider deep dive analysis for these proposals before making a decision. Just 3 weeks is not sufficient time to make the right decision that impacts thousands of kids and their families. If we still have to decide by Nov 21 than I strongly support Dr Wu's proposal as it involves moving around 3000 students in total, less than half of other proposals(7500 or 9000). His explanation of these moves clearly reflects that he has considered a lot of feedbacks from communities. Dr Wu's plan proposes to move as less students as possible (spend as less money as possible too), keep community together and keep a good feeder system. Thanks Meenu Suri Resident ofpolygon 176 > On Oct 29, 2019, at 8:34 PM, Meenu Yahoo <meenul llsuri@yahoo. com> wrote: > > Dear BOE members > > We live in polygon 176 which is 1. 5 miles away from River Hill high school. The proposed Redistricting plan by Dr. Martinaro and Ms Mallo plans are againstpolicy 6010. They are swappingour kids out ofRiver Hill high school which is under capacity schools to WLHS which is 7-8 miles away (pis see attached map). Swapping does not address overcrowding nor does changing buildings and busing kids achieve equity. > > Back in Aug, Dr Martinaro came up with a plan totally different than suggestions from feasibility studies. > > Yesterday Ms Mallo came up with another new planjust 3 weeks before the final date. Its like everyone is bringing band-aid solutions that does not fix the root cause. These proposals should be throughly analysed not mshed like that. We are looking at 7, 000 plus kids and their families. And now we are listening to new plans just 3 weeks before Nov 21 th confirmation? > > As BOE, you should not rashthm this. This is very serious issue and > should be addressed with adequate research. During yesterday's work session, most ofthe relevant data was not even available to review. How can you possible make right decisions within such short period of time?? > > We teach kids to follow the rules and processes. This is setting a very wrong example. > > Per yesterday's Ms Mallo's new plan, polygon 176 and 3176 are divided into 2 separate high schools. > > Polygon 176 and 3176 (walnut grove and Walnut Creek communities) are extremely tight knit communities located on Sheppardlane, Clarksville. Pis see attachedmap. These are notjust polygons. > > . Walnut Creek starts from within Walnut Grove and several homes can be driven to from the Grove entrance only which is via Preakness Circle Ln. > . The first bus stop for both Grove and Creek is at the intersection ofPreakness Circle Ln and Clay Circle Ln. Kids from both the communities meet at this location. This bus stop is 1.4 miles from RHHS. > . Walnut Grove polygon is 3176 andWalnut Creek polygon is 176. >. Ms. Malta's plan is keeping3176 at RHHS andmoving 176toWLHS. > . The feed from FQMSto WLHSwould be less than 10%. > > Pis do not break our communities. Pleasekeep 3176 and 176 at River Hill high school. > ><imagel.jpeg> > > > <image2.jpeg> > ><image3. jpeg> > > > Thanks > Meenu Suri > Resident ofPolygon 176 > > Sent from my iPhone Michael Kasbeer-Betty Polygon 181 Members of the Howard County School Board, My comments address high school redistricting. There are a number of issues with the revised Adjustment Area Proposal plan that Ms. Mallo proposed on October 28, 2019. Polygon 181 would be moved to Wilde Lake High School with an extremely small feed. Currently we attend River Hill High School in an approximate 30%feed from Folly QuarterMiddle School. The remaining -70% of FQMSgoes to Glenelg High School. By keeping polygons 3176 and 176 at River Hill High School and moving polygons 180, 181, and 1180 to Wilde Lake High School this plan creates an unacceptably small feed (-12%) of students traveling alone to Wilde Lake. This small feed is directly against Policy 6010 of less than 15% feeds. Please do not create a small feed like this for our children. The children of our Woodmark community deserve better than this 2. Moving polygons 180, 181 and 1180 from RHHS to WLHSmoves children from one under capacity school to another. There is no reason per Policy 6010 to move children from their closer school - and one that is in their community - since RHHS is not overcrowded. 3. Moving proposed polygons 53, 66, 134, 1066, 1134, 2053, 2134, 2135, 2174 from WLHSto RHSS also moves children from one under capacity school to another. In addition, this results in polygons that are geographically disconnected from their new school. a. Road travel to RHHS is not straight forward and will result in excessive bussing and children who are not going to school in their direct community.