- The 17.4 acre property was to be dedicated as Rural Open Space land in perpetuity as part of the development of homes.
- The Board of Education decided they wanted the 17.4 acre property for a new Farquhar Middle School.
- The Planning Board tried to dedicate the land "willy-nilly". (See page 13 of Circuit Court Opinion)
- The Circuit Court has now said no to the Planning Board's "willy-nilly" vote and told them to go back and fix their vote to comply with the dedication of Rural Open Space land in perpetuity.
- The Circuit Court's decision swats down the BOE's plan to take over this Rural Open Space land for use as a public school.
20121220_Hyde_v_MCPB_revised_12.19.2012
'willy nilly' is nothing new for this planning board and planning department. Here is another 'willy nilly' act: passing the revised accessory apartments zoning and sending it on to the County Council. Why? because they didn't understand it. too hard. too boring. To clarify, the elected County Council appoints the members of the Planning Board. Right now the Planning Board is looking for a new planning dept. director to replace Rollin Stanley. I bet you can't wait.
ReplyDeleteword on the street is the boe is already preparing a condemnation suit despite this ruling. tough to justify commendation when they didn't even look at alternative sites. keep an eye on the monthly legal fee report because no one at the boe will.
ReplyDeletemaybe they can back charge song for all of these legal bills. he's the one that lied to them about the ownership when this went to vote over a year ago. not like there's video to prove that he lied. oh wait, there is..
http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2011/09/fact-check-board-got-fact-or-fiction.html
at least Starr nipped it in the bud an told staff to stop design work until the ownership issue was resolved
"the design process will commence once M-NCPPC has made a decision in this matter"
http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2011/11/starr-apologizes.html
but wait, starr voted, along with the boe, to let HCM have a 1,700,000.00 contract to design the school after that and without a resolution on the land? but, i thought he said...
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/boe/meetings/agenda/2011-12/2011-1108/5.2.1%20Farquhar.pdf
and here's the school that shouldn't be designed yet, on a property owned by pulte, dedicated to park and planning and with plat restrictions against any future construction and subject to a multiple conservation easements.
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/construction/projects/Docs/WHFMS2012_6_28%20Farquhar%20SD%204.pdf
are these county employees accountable to no one? maybe andrew ujifusa will write a follow up article.
song lied about the ownership to get the feasibility approved.
starr lied about waiting on the "design" process.
and all the while they are wasting the taxpayers' money and staff time without any accountability to the citizens or the county council.
It is not the BOE's fault that the County Council is not interested in 'accountability.' These are all elected officials. Montgomery County gets the government it deserves, to coin a phrase.
DeleteWow! So much for a Parent’s Coalition that works for our students and “improving responsiveness and performance of MCPS”.
ReplyDeleteFrom the majority of postings I have read regarding the FMS modernization (or any other issue, for that matter), the Parent's Coalition is “for hire” for any individual or family that has a beef with MCPS. This organization has not worked to form a consensus with MCPS, the schools, or Olney community through these postings. Rather, this blog site functions as a continuous gripe session for the coalition.
MCPS, the greater Olney community, and Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission have been working diligently to modernize FMS in a manner that would avoid an unacceptably long commute for MCPS middle school students while at the same time providing a public park that could be enjoyed by all Montgomery County residents. At this point, I truly do not understand the coalition's function is as an organization. If it is “dedicated to improving responsiveness and performance of MCPS”, then stop acting as a gossip monger and take action to assist MCPS, the greater Olney community, and the Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission to modernize FMS. The Parent's Coalition is all talk, and no action- shame on the coalition for operating under the pretense of improving MCPS.
@Anonymous - As usual, no name behind the comment. Sad that you don't have the courage of your convictions.
DeleteWith regard to your anonymous rant, the Parents' Coalition did not make Maryland law and did not write the above opinion. Just because something is a "good idea" does not make it LEGAL. In the BOE and Planning Board's attempt to violate Maryland law taxpayers are funding EXPENSIVE LITIGATION. And, there will be more.
All that LITIGATION takes money AWAY from CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION. It's a choice, as always. The choice is to keep teachers in classrooms, or attempt to violate Maryland law, get sued and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in senseless litigation.
Shame on you anonymous for not working for a LEGAL solution!
Did you read this Opinion? Did you read what happened? Did you read how the Planning Board attorney gave the Planning Board advice? Taxpayers paid for all of that, and then paid for the advice to be ignored and the predictable litigation.
This is not the ONLY proposed school property currently in litigation. But, you don't care about that, do you? Keeping your blinders on, you totally miss the big picture. And, you miss the big price tag that taxpayers and students are paying for the Board of Education's "we are above the law" attitude.
What about if the BOE looked for LEGAL solutions to public school facility issues? Why are you opposed to that plan?
Ms. Sartucci- speaking as a member of the greater Olney community and in response to "Anonymous" above, I have actively worked alongside many other Olney citizens and FMS parents toward a legal and budget saving solution to the FMS modernization since prior to 2011. It is interesting- at all the Feasibility Study meetings, GOCA meetings, public hearings, meetings with Maryland state delegates, Maryland state senators, community meetings, etc., I have never once heard a representative from the Parent's Coalition of Montgomery County speak or offer to assist the parents of FMS who are working toward an amicable solution for Farquhar Middle School's modernization. I have, however, read plenty of postings where the Parent's Coalition has criticized or found fault in every step that the FMS parent's and community have made toward solving the student transport issue while trying to build a community park for all. The Parent's Coalition does not deserve the respect of Montgomery County's citizens who are working to better their community.
ReplyDeleteMs. Lampshire, Thanks for your comment.
DeleteWhat LEGAL solution have you worked for? We would be happy to post your proposal. Please forward!
Obviously, taking over land that is part of a development and dedicated in perpetuity as Rural Open Space is not a legal solution.
What has been your solution to the student transport issue that has existed in MCPS for decades? We would be thrilled to post your solution to this issue that has impacted every single public school modernization that has not been done on site.
MCPS is a very large school system. The issue of modernization is not isolated to just this one middle school. What is your group doing to solve this problem for ALL MCPS children? Let's get that proposal out on the table! Thanks.
Ms. Lampshire,
DeleteHow about some facts to go with your complaints? What about if MCPS Administrators told the TRUTH when speaking to the Board of Education?
http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2011/09/fact-check-board-got-fact-or-fiction.html
Wouldn't telling the TRUTH be in the best interest of the kids? I assume your organization is in support of telling the truth while working toward a solution?
Who is served by MCPS Administrators giving false information to the BOE? Certainly NOT the students and certainly NOT the public. As we have seen here, once again, the public and the students pay for the false statements made by MCPS administrators at the Board of Education table.
If the truth had been told at that meeting, the process would have stopped dead in its tracks. But the lie kicked off a series of subsequent lies and now everyone is too far down the path to turn back.
DeleteWhat a great way to run a government and an even better lesson to your kids on how to obtain what you want at any cost.
Maybe Ms. Lampshire is upset because she thought she had the Planning Board in her hip pocket.
DeleteSee the excerpt below where she, as part of the Future Farquhar Community Coalition Executive Board, thanked the Planning Board for not properly applying the easement in the first place.
"The Montgomery County Planning Board, for not allowing the Hydes to put an easement on the land swap property back in June (this would have ended the land swap option)." (From the Brooke Grove Elementary School PTA Facebook Page - 9/14/11)
The fact they blame the Hydes when it was actually the Planning Board that was circumventing the legal process is another story all together.
Full FB Post:
BGES PTA Not only did they choose the land swap option (the 3-story version, which allows more space for fields), but they added language to Dr. Starr's draft resolution strengthening their committment to the land swap. Tilden is still a backup option if Parks and Planning doesn't "support" the land swap (we think they do and will). The Board of Education discussed bringing the modernization back up before the Board if land swap "support" becomes an issue.
This is a HUGE VICTORY for our cause - and everyone on this list is to thank. Letters, e-mails, appearances at GOCA meetings - all the actions we took were critical to getting the decision that is the best for our children.
THIS ISN'T OVER YET - but it is a huge step towards getting the land swap started. MCPS will now work details with the Maryland National Capital Parks & Planning Commission. They will have their own public hearing on this issue - which we must come out in force to testify at. Farquhar's next door neighbors, the Hydes, will most certainly be there to testify against the land swap, as they did today.
Over the last 6 months we got critical help from friends in the community - which we'd like to thank now. It's late, and please forgive us if we forget a few names:
The PTAs of Farquhar, Brooke Grove, Sherwood, Cloverly and Stonegate. Gail Kahan and Joe Griffin, the PTA Presidents of Brooke Grove and Farquhar, testified today and we thank you!
The Mid County Citizens Advisory Board - with a special thanks to our Olney representaive Greg Intoccia.
Our AMAZING State Senators and Delegates - Karen Montgomery, Roger Manno, Anne Kaiser, Craig Zucker, Sam Arora, and Eric Luedtke - and their diligent staffs.
The Board of Education, for listening to all of our pleas and making the right choice - especially Phil Kauffman, for enduring so many of our meetings
Jim Song, Ray Marhamati, and their MCPS staffs, for developing the land swap into feasible options - including the incredibly patient and hard-working architects from Hord Coplan and Macht
The Montgomery County Planning Board, for not allowing the Hydes to put an easement on the land swap property back in June (this would have ended the land swap option)
The Homeowners Associations in Olney and the surrounding areas who endorsed the land swap
Farquhar principal Diane Morris and her staff, for their assistance with the FAC meetings
Dave "Bud" Lunden, our legal eagle for land issues
Our spiritual advisor from Potomac (you know who you are)
AND A VERY, VERY SPECIAL THANK YOU: Without this person, we'd all probably drowning our sorrows after today's decision. Without this person, there would be no land swap. Her failure to accept Tilden as an option and digging through Montgomery County land records "found" the property next door to Farquhar - and allowed everything that's happened since.
ROBIN BRUCKNER, we're all in your debt.
We're so thankful you got involved!
With Warmest Regards,
The Farquhar Community Coalition Executive Committee:
Angela Edwards, Jennifer McKneely, Robin Bruckner, Laura Lampshire, Andrea Keller, Anne Rood, Ric Wugalter, Susan Marra, Joe & Patti Pasternak, Rob Hanson, Shabeen Jafri, Troy & Felicia Kimmel
September 14, 2011 at 8:15am · Like · 1
operating under the guise of "for the kids" does not allow one to ignore applicable regulations and laws.
ReplyDeletei would ask you how you feel mcps has operated in an open and honest manner? staff was bullied into this path by the parents and now staff is trying to bully everyone in their way. (which is ironic because all of this is to prevent bullying on a bus.)
there have been a series of misrepresentations and lies since the start of the process. but, I guess, all is forgiven and no one should be held accountable when it is "for the kids".
Legal solutions? MCPS didn't evaluate a single other site for this modernization. They picked it because it was there and the parents, not land use attorneys, not land planners, and not Park and Planning, told them it would work. Then, after the plan had been sold to the parents, they went about figuring out if it would actually work.
ReplyDeleteThe shame is they sold the solution to the parents, before they knew if they could actually implement it. And now the parents may have sealed their own fate because MCPS's approved "Plan B" is not an on-site modernization while the existing school remains in operation (a completely workable and economically viable solution), but is the option of busing to Tilden. The only one with any real foresight, and appreciation of the site's challenges, was the architect who was wise enough to design a school that would work on the "swap parcel" as well as the existing school site. At least the architecture dollars might not go completely to waste. (How many teachers salaries are covered by $1,700,000?)
The current efforts of MCPS would open every conservation parcel, forest conservation easement and agricultural parcel up to future school construction and throw out hundreds of hours of work by civic associations, the county council and the planning department.
In a County that takes great pride in its planning process, its a shame that MCPS shows such disregard for the process. (Please keep in mind that the FMS modernization was contemplated in the CIP for some time and MCPS could have requested this disputed site as part of the Master Plan process (2005) or approval of the Pulte subdivision (2009), but only requested a simple sidewalk connection.)
I guess that arrogance comes with operating unchecked with a $2.2 billion budget.
Ms. Lampshire,
ReplyDeleteLet's start at the beginning. Why does this building need to be completely torn down/gutted/leveled?
Let's start with that. For years, the BOE has been tearing down perfectly usable buildings without discussion.
Why? Who profits? That's an easy question. The construction companies profit! Lots of NO BID contracts there! Lots of cash flowing without oversight and without accountability! Lots of fun to be had!
But, for what? The Parents' Coalition has heard many, many complaints about the "modernization" of MCPS facilities over the years. The end result often ends up with as many or more problems than the original building. Isn't this something for a public discussion?
What about taking perfectly usable buildings and RENOVATING them? We do that all the time with offices, homes, etc... Why doesn't that apply to public school buildings?
What about maintaining our existing buildings? We all know that one of the main reasons MCPS buildings are being torn down is because they have been allowed to decay for years. What if buildings were maintained in the first place?
Has your community explored these issues? Have they gotten detailed estimates from outside sources? (Sorry, we know we can't trust MCPS to give accurate estimates.)
We have met and talked to architects and construction workers who built some of the MCPS buildings that have now been demolished. They are always at a loss as to why the Board of Education tears down solid brick and mortar buildings.
Is "modernization" really the only solution to maintaining our public school buildings?
At the bottom you'll see Mrs. Lampshire's name along with another name that seems to be following all of MCPS's controversial projects. (Brickyard anyone?)
ReplyDelete"Montgomery County Public Schools face some serious challenges in the years to come. An increasing school-age population, flat County tax revenues, and an uncertain contribution from the State are but a few. These challenges will require pragmatic, innovative solutions, collaboration and certainly some hard choices by the Board of Education. The Future Farquhar Community Coalition knows that Rebecca Smondrowski is eminently qualified to be part of the Board in these times.
In our struggle to find a solution for Farquhar Middle School’s modernization that benefits the entire community, Rebecca’s personal involvement and counsel has been invaluable. Having seen how important Montgomery County and its people are to Rebecca first hand, we wholeheartedly endorse her candidacy for the open Board of Education seat."
Troy Kimmel
On behalf of the Future Farquhar Community Coalition Executive Board
[Angela Edwards, Jennifer McKneely, Robin Bruckner, Felicia Kimmel, Laura Lampshire, Anne Rood, Susan Ramsay, Andrea Keller, Robert Hanson, Ric Wugalter, Joe Pasternak, Patty Pasternak, and A. Shabeen Jafri]
Ms. Lampshire,
ReplyDeleteYou wrote above that you are a member of the greater Olney community. I am a member of the Olney community, too, and I can safely say that your interests and the interests of some FMS parents are not necessarily representative of the entire Olney community.
Had the FMS parents not demanded that the land swap occur, the BOE would have been able to move ahead with the renovation project. Instead, the demands of inflexible FMS parents have caused the renovation project to stall, and it's now entirely uncertain when FMS will be modernized.
POST 1 of 2
ReplyDeleteWow - the anonymi seem to love citing my writing, so I'll chime in for future post fodder.
There's lots of really, really wrong information in the previous posts that I'll correct below:
1) "i would ask you how you feel mcps has operated in an open and honest manner?...There have been a series of misrepresentations and lies [by MCPS] since the start of the process."
7 community meetings, with an open invitation to submit comments and choices of feasibility study options were done by MCPS prior to choosing the land-swap option. The final comments received by MCPS were on the order of 135 for the land swap option, 5 for other options. The greater Olney Civic Association (GOCA), neighbors, and impacted PTAs were notified of all meetings. Sounds pretty open to me.
2) "If the truth had been told at that [Board of Education] meeting, the process would have stopped dead in its tracks. But the lie kicked off a series of subsequent lies and now everyone is too far down the path to turn back."
Jim Song was repeating mistaken information that he got from another source. I know because the same thing happened to me. AND - the Board of Education approved a backup plan in case the community's overwhelmingly preferred option (see (1) above) couldn't be implemented.
3) "And now the parents may have sealed their own fate because MCPS's approved "Plan B" is not an on-site modernization while the existing school remains in operation (a completely workable and economically viable solution), but is the option of busing to Tilden."
The on-site modernization was not completely workable - in fact it left the school sited WAY in the back of the existing lot, meaning bus driveways and drop offs would be connected through driveways that cut the entire lot in half. It also makes the school a construction zone for 3 years (not the 2 needed for other options) - which rightly scares the hell out of MCPS. We only do this for high schools because there is no holding facility for them. The community would lose the use of the (heavily used) Farquhar sports fields for 3 years as well.
POST 2 of 2
ReplyDelete4) "Obviously, taking over land that is part of a development and dedicated in perpetuity as Rural Open Space is not a legal solution. "
Let's get one thing clear - the land to the north of Farquhar is being dedicated as "Rural Open Space" as the law states. But - the law also states that "Rural Open Space" uses can be as stated in the relevant Master Plan. In this case, the Olney Master Plan states (p.119), "...the approximately 17-acre portion of the Casey property next to Farquhar Middle School, would serve the need for a future active recreation local park in the area and could be shared by the school."
So we're not talking about a verdant plain with Bambi and Thumper playing, we're talking about a park with playing fields that is SUPPOSED to be shared by the school.
AND - no one EVER, EVER, EVER discussed or even mentioned the possibility that MCPS would "take over" the parkland. It was to be SWAPPED for the existing school site which is actually 2.9 acres larger - making for even MORE "Rural Open Space." One would think anyone who truly cared about Rural Open Space would be FOR this.
5) "The current efforts of MCPS would open every conservation parcel, forest conservation easement and agricultural parcel up to future school construction and throw out hundreds of hours of work by civic associations, the county council and the planning department."
Again - not true. MCPS and M-NCPPC have collaborated on schools next to parks (which is all this is about) before - granting easements and sharing bordering land when schools have been constructed or modernized. Most recently, Paint Branch HS did this. This is a bogus "slippery slope" argument.
6) And speaking of bogus arguments, Mr. Wilen, NOBODY'S interests are representative of a larger community's. The parents of Farquhar have been involved from the start of this discussion of modernization, speaking with members of the community and trying to win their support for an option that keeps kids from being bussed for 3 hours a day for 2 years, gets Olney its new "active recreation park" about 10 years sooner than current plans, and creates a school site that isn't substandard for the next 50+ years of building life. We encountered opposition, yes, but the community supported at least part of this plan (well, except for some who misrepresented their civic group's positions, see link below. I wonder who else in her family knew about that misrepresentation?).
http://www.gazette.net/article/20111019/NEWS/710199590/1022/parents-question-goca-s-letter-regarding-farquhar-modernization&template=gazette
All of the accusations of malfeasance thrown at MCPS, M-NCPPC and the Planning Board are, from my perspective, wrong as well. I've met many of the civil servants that we trust to run our schools, parks, and planning process, and I haven't met one bastard in the bunch. In fact - they're all pretty committed to doing the best job for their community. They often have impossible tasks, and sometimes run afoul of the gazillion pages of County Code that dictate life here in MoCo, but I have yet to see an instance where these people weren't acting in the community's best interest. That's just my perspective, for what it's worth.
I hope that Farquhar's modernization gets done in a way that helps the kids and the community. That's been my only goal for the last 20 months of dealing with this issue. What's your goal?
Regards,
Troy Kimmel
Proud member of the Future Farquhar Community Coalition and parent of 2 MCPS students
Mr. Kimmel,
DeleteAs they say, tell it to the judge. The Circuit Court has ruled and apparently you are wrong about the law and what you "think" it says.
You are also wrong about the role of MCPS staff. Their job really isn't that hard, and certainly NOT impossible.
Honesty and factual information would go a long way at 850 Hungerford Drive! The list of "mistaken" information from MCPS staff is very, very long. How is it they can get so much "mistaken" information?
Telling the truth would allow the BOE to make PUBLIC decisions with all of the FACTS. When the BOE uses "mistaken" information the public is deceived and their decisions are based on incorrect information.
Really, how hard is it to see the name on a deed? Not hard at all. And not something that should be assumed. Very easy to find out who owns land. Just read the land records as recorded. (I was able to read the land records as Mr. Song was giving the BOE incorrect information. It wasn't hard at all to find out the truth.)
This is not rocket science. Public schools exist all over the country and BOEs make decisions about public school land every day. Honest, factual information is found all over the country. Why not here?
There can be no open and transparent decision making if the accurate facts, data and costs are not provided to the BOE. 7 meetings, 20 meetings, 50 meetings - none of those meetings mean anything if the truthful information is not being presented. Meetings without facts are just a charade. That's not open government.
Hey Troy-
Delete20 months later and you're still talking "swap".
You, Song and Starr still dont understand, or want to acknowledge, that MNCPPC can't swap what it doesnt own. Or is the judge, and the rest of us, missing something?
Park and Planning didn't own the property 20 months ago and they won't own it 20 months from now.
If MCPS wants the property, they will need to take it. Another lawsuit, another 18 months and more money down the drain. Maybe it's time for staff to start down the path of Plan B.
Dr. Strarr wrote a CYA letter that said design work would not take place until MNCPPC made their decision and the ownership issue was resolved. One thing that is clear from this chain is that this issue is far from "resolved".
DeleteWho is accountable for spending over a million dollars in design work in direct violation of the superintendent's letter?
No accountability when it is someone else's money. This is the point that is continually overlooked. It's black and white. The Gazette exposes Mr. Song's misinformation, Dr. Starr writes a cover your a** letter promising to hold off until this issue is figured out, staff goes about its business of designing a school despite the public being told that the flow of funds would stop. The taxpayer's money continues to be wasted.
Song, Starr, or the BOE will never admit that they are wrong.
Mr. Kimmel,
ReplyDeleteResponding to #6 -- the Gazette didn't tell the whole story, mainly because the reporter was verbally beaten to death by you and your group. But that's all water under the bridge at this point.
MCPS was ready to move ahead with the renovation project until you made demands that MCPS could not and would not meet. Your outrageous demands have set the project back years, maybe even a decade. In the meantime, MCPS is going ahead with renovation of schools that have parents who are willing to accept the inconvenience of temporary relocation.
Check back here in 2020 and let me know how that renovation project is going.
Mr. Wilen, Please explain "the rest of the story" as I am curious what is missing from the article aside from the fact your wife was apparently involved in providing a recommendation to the BOE, on behalf of GOCA, which was in fact completely opposite of the resolution voted on by GOCA. Did you know of your wife's false testimony before she submitted it? Did she not state that GOCA recommended that the BOE vote for sending our students to Tilden, when in fact the opposite was true? Please, let us know the "whole story" about this.
ReplyDeleteYour voice may be a loud one in the Olney community, but it does not represent a majority. I am stunned as to how you can oppose a plan that saves our students hours a day commuting across the county to a subpar facility and provides even more parkland for the community.
Again, the Court has spoken. This is not a soap opera or reality TV. This is planning for a public school construction project.
DeleteThe BOE pretended that they were above the law and could build on land that was not theirs. They were wrong. The Planning Board acted "willy-nilly" as stated by the Circuit Court Opinion. The Montgomery County Circuit Court has now ruled.
Ignoring the law and the title to the land has cost TAXPAYERS a ton of money at a time when the economy is floundering. We don't need any more money spent on fruitless litigation.
The BOE can put together a plan that follows the law. They can build on any land they own and move forward. As an alternative, they can renovate the existing building. Either way, spend the tax dollars to fix this building and focus on the education of public school students. We can all go to Hulu and watch soaps.
Anonymous again? I write under my name. Why don't you?
ReplyDeleteMy wife's testimony was not "false". The truth is that the Future Farquhar Community Coalition members -- -- who previously had little or no involvement in GOCA -- suddenly decided to begin attending GOCA meetings entirely for the purpose of supporting goals that benefited some community members while inflicting damage on long-time, nearby property owners. (By the way, where are the FFCC members now? I haven't seen them at GOCA meetings recently.) My wife's testimony was an attempt to be conciliatory toward both sides.
Let's look at where project is now. After persuading the BOE to disregard the law and costing the taxpayers lots of money, the FFCC has done little more than introduce delays into the project. Because of their arrogance and unrealistic demands, the children will wait years longer for the renovation to even begin.
The schools that my children attended -- Cashell, Redland, and Magruder -- were all of the same vintage as Farquhar, and were all due for renovation in the past several years. Instead of making unrealistic demands, the community supported the use of a holding school for Cashell students and got a beautiful new school. For Redland (c. 1971), the community worked with the school to do an "in place" renovation instead of demanding a new school building. For Magruder (c. 1970) the highly supportive and effective principal and financial manager worked with the community to renovate the areas of the school that had been neglected, and we now have a school that is 98% as good as a brand new school at 3% of the cost of a new school.
Mr. Wilen-
DeleteYour statement is honest and logical. It will therefore be ignored by MCPS and FFCC.
Mr. Kimmel,
DeleteYou know why the community never showed up?
The project was "advertised" as an on-site modernization. This was the plan for over a decade in the school system's CIP.
Drive by the site today and the sign is still posted with a Public Notice sign for the Batchellors Forest Subdivision and links to a Site Plan which continues to show the property as ROS for dedication to MNCPPC. The property was never properly posted nor was the community ever notified that the "swap" parcel was being considered for the new school.
Even the notice for the schematic design referenced only the existing school site.
Not only are the demands high and was a renovation never fully evaluated, but the new $35,000,000 school will accommodate 100 students less, I repeat less, than the existing school.
DeleteSpeaking of this Future Farquhar Community Coalition.. Who are they are they and how are they organized? They are actively fundraising, actively lobbying Park and Planning and the Board of Education (and individual members of both), and endorsed candidates in return for support? Yet, I don't see them on the State registry as a corporation or as charitable organization.
ReplyDeleteBGES PTA · 80 like this
March 23 at 10:05am ·
Thanks to all of you, we raised almost $350 from our Fundraiser on Wednesday.
Olney Beer and Fine Wines - your support is greatly appreciated!
There's something we can ALL do RIGHT NOW to help out the land swap, by helping those who have supported us.
PHIL KAUFFMAN and REBECCA SMONDROWSKI have been great supporters of the Farquhar land-swap. They're also running for election to the Board of Education.
The primary is on April 3rd and they need OUR support. If they don't get through the primary, they can't win! There are three ways to vote in this primary:
1. You can vote on April 3rd at your regular polling place.
2. VOTE EARLY at any of the locations located at the following link: EARLY VOTING CENTERS
3. VOTE ABSENTEE - If you'll be on Spring Break on April 3rd, print the attached form
2012_Absentee_Ballot_Application_English.pdf
and fax it asap (before March 27th) to the Montgomery County Board of Elections, 240-777-8560.
Phil and Rebecca have gone to bat for us, now we can return the favor. We'll continue to need their support to counter the Hyde family's procedural roadblocks to completing the land-swap.
Regards and Thanks,
The Future Farquhar Community Coalition Executive Committee
www.FMSLandSwap.org
Mr. Wilen, your statement that Magruder is 98% as good as new building is simply inaccurate. The building is plaqued with problems. Just this year the fire alarm needed major repair and was barely functioning when school began. The PA system has struggled to work in recent years. Just this year the air conditioning units failed regularly this past fall, the heating units were unable to heat the building and resulting in classroom temparatures below 60 degrees during school hours and the cafeteria couldn't serve food one day because it lost hot water.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally there are classrooms and office space that date back 30+ years and aren't nearly as functional as they would be in a new building.
Those are all maintenance issues. None of those issues would be solved by a tear down. New schools still need maintenance. MCPS doesn't provide it and they have all the same problems you just described. New schools need heating and cooling maintenance, plumbing maintenance, and electrical maintenance. Taxpayers simply can't afford to tear down an entire building simply because there is no hot water one day. That isn't how we live in homes, is it? We do repairs as needed. That's what MCPS needs to do. Repair as needed instead of letting buildings rot.
DeleteAdding to the reply by Anon of 8:28 AM -- agreed, those are all maintenance issues. It's not necessary to tear down and replace a building to fix a fire alarm system. The PA system was replaced in approximately 2009. If it needs repair, then the administration needs to put in a work order and if the work isn't done in a timely fashion, the administration needs to bring the problem to the attention of the superintendent.
ReplyDeleteAs for the A/C -- again, this is a maintenance issue, not only at Magruder, but at many MCPS schools. Instead of hiring more HVAC technicians and modernizing old HVAC systems, former superintendent Weast hired lots of $160,000 and up support staff and paid for lots of meals at Il Pizzaco and other restaurants. Fortunately, the BOE recently approved funds for modernization of HVAC at many schools, but it's going to take several years for schools to recover from the many years of neglect.
Classrooms of 30 years ago (i.e. Magruder classrooms) aren't much different from classrooms of today. I've been to the newest schools and, with the exception of the music rooms, the classrooms haven't changed much at all. (Magruder has just as many Promethean Boards as the new high schools, by the way.)If you're talking about science labs, then yes, they have changed over the past 30 years, but it it's not necessary to tear-down a school to modernize a science lab.
Also to Anon of 7:38 AM: I don't know if you are a parent, a student, a staff member, or just an interested community member, but if you know of problems at Magruder (or any school) that aren't being fixed in a timely manner, then I urge you to talk to the Magruder principal about the problems and urge him to put pressure on the maintenance staff to get the problems fixed promptly. If you're not satisfied by his response, then go to a public BOE meeting and tell the BOE what needs repair.
ReplyDeleteMagruder's administration has worked very hard to overcome the issues with the building at Magruder. There is no disagreement there. But there is no way the building is "98 percent" of a new building at 3% of the cost as you indicated (where are these numbers coming from?). While some of the issues are perhaps maintenance issues, many are not.
ReplyDeleteThe fire alarm in parts of the building were installed three different times, one for each modernization/addition. They don't work well together and never have. Ask anyone who has had kids at Magruder or who has worked at Magruder for a long period of time. One system would certainly be better than the three that constantly need to be worked on.
Similar issues exist with heating/AC units. Installed at different times and all on different systems instead of one system.
For years many of the science classrooms were setup so they couldn't run certain types of lab experiments. While most of those recently have been changed it took years to do so.
The building still has asbestos in it.
The auditorium and cafeteria are in their original space and never were increased in size as the school grew in population.
The list could go on.
If you want to argue that lots of money was saved by renovating Magruder onsite that's fine. It most certainly was. However, the building is in no way close to the new high schools that have been built recently such as Paint Branch and Richard Montgomery. Simply saying it doesn't make it so.
And that's the main point. There is a difference between renovating a building in place and building an entirely new building.
Perhaps it is more cost effective to renovate and troubleshoot as Magruder has done, but it certainly isn't accurate to say Magruder is 98% similar to a new school at 3% of the cost.
What? Magruder can run science experiments? Really? Churchill HS can't and Churchill got a "modernization". But in the modernization all the science labs were undersized and can't be used for actual labs.
DeleteYou want to talk AC problems? Check out Churchill HS. Again, no fix in a modernization.
Your fantasy of what a "modernization" means doesn't jive with reality. MCPS doesn't build perfect buildings. "New" buildings don't "work" either.
Auditoriums will never be sized to fit the entire population now that MCPS has gone to 1 lunch for entire high schools, so that's never going to be fixed.
The list goes on - at the schools that have had MCPS "modernizations". The lists are long and the repairs pile up. Any building needs to be maintained, that's the key issue. MCPS lets buildings fall apart no matter their age.
Anon of 3:10 PM:
ReplyDeleteDoes the fire alarm system meet the fire code? If you think that it doesn't, call the building inspector and the Montgomery County fire chief. The staff and children at Magruder are entitled to have a fire alarm system that meets code. Again, this is a matter of design and maintenance. There is no shortage of qualified fire alarm contractors. A new building isn't needed to solve a fire alarm system problem.
Have you notified the Board of Education about the HVAC problems? I've been in Magruder lots of times and the only HVAC system that I recall having chronic problems was the one for the gym. It was supposed to have been replaced recently. Is the new system not working correctly? Has a work order been submitted to get the problems corrected? It's very common for large buildings to have multiple HVAC systems and the technology for getting them to "work together" is proven and widely used. In fact, having multiple HVAC systems eliminates the possibility of having a single point of failure.
Is the asbestos exposed and flaking? If it's really a hazard, the MCPS asbestos abatement team should come in and remove it. When my kids were at Magruder, I requested the asbestos abatement team to remove the asbestos wiring over the stage. They removed it promptly. Procedures for safely removing asbestos are in place, and all that is needed is for someone to submit a request to have the asbestos removed. Again, this is a maintenance issue, not something that requires an entire new school building. See: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/maintenance/shadygrove/asbestos/index.shtm. Magruder is maintained by the Clarksburg depot. I've found the folks at the Clarksburg depot to be responsive and helpful. Here's their contact information: http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/maintenance/clarksburg/index.shtm
On the issue of the undersized cafeteria what has the Magruder PTSA done to advocate for additional cafeteria space? It seems so obvious that when you add student seats to a school, you also need to add cafeteria space. Why hasn't the PTSA advocated for a second cafeteria?
ReplyDelete