My son is second grade and I do not want his schooling disrupted.
L
Lynne Wengrow
9 years ago
No to option No. 3!
J
Joan Bruggemann
9 years ago
Strongly oppose this option
T
Triple_lutz33
9 years ago
No on option 3. This option no longer makes any sense to maplewood people and you know what I mean by now. Not a long term fix and really displaces maplewood families. It's not a safe idea to move elementary kids that far away from their homes. They forget stuff and traffic back and forth in that area is a mess.
J
James McCurdy
9 years ago
No to option 3! My grandchildren will lose their precious elementary across the street to be bused across town! My children bought in Sylvania because they trusted you to make smart decisions for my grandchildren. Option 3 is a waste of tax dollars on a brand new school and outrageously long bus rides across the district, precious time and money wasted! Studies show too many transitions hurt adolescents. 4 for most Sylvania kids and 5 for my own kids! They should only have three schools. Don't fix what's not broken using tax dollars unnecessarily while causing harm to our youth! Good luck passing another levy when you make crucial decisions putting our students and our home values in harm's way. Option 1 for Sylvania!
D
Dennis Ramsey
9 years ago
Option 3 keeps our grandchildren from going to the school across the street. No to long commutes. How is this saving on busing?
J
John Szparka
9 years ago
$100,000....who's paying for that?
Not a great plan to keep future levies passing. Us 'empty nesters ' who had 4 kids graduate from Sylvania schools and have/will have 13+ grandkids in the Highland area are not fans of option 3.
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
I am concerned about the switching of so many schools. I do not have a child in Maplewood but I think this option will have a negative effect on that neighborhood.
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
Demar
A
Andrew Dymarkowski
9 years ago
When i saw this i was absolutely blown away. I am infuriated that this would actually become a thing. Many good people will be put out of work.
D
Darren Boeke
9 years ago
Do not take Maplewood from the local community. Too far to bus elementary kids across town.
L
Linda Bailey
9 years ago
FIRST OF ALL OPTION 3 IS NOT AN OPTION. BELOW ARE JUST SOME REASONS:
I HAVE LIVED ONLY ONE MILE DOWN THE ROAD FROM TIMBERSTONE FOR THE PAST 17 YEARS. MY SON WAS THE FIRST 6TH GRADE CLASS AT TIMBERSTONE. FEEDER SCHOOLS WERE PROPORTIONATELY DRAWN TO VARIOUS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, JUNIOR HIGHS AND HIGH SCHOOLS. THIS WAS LOGICAL REDISTRICTING. SOCIOECONOMICS WAS S ALSO CONSIDERED IN DISTRICTING LINES DRAWN,
STUDENTS STARTING SYLVANIA SCHOOLS NOW WILL HAVE TO CHANGE SCHOOLS 4 (SOME 5) TIMES IN K THRU 12. MY GRANDSONS ARE CURRENTLY ATTENDING MAPLEWOOD ELEMENTARY LIVING ONLY 4 HOUSES AWAY FROM THE SCHOOL.
THE ABOVE IS NOT ALL OF MY MESSAGE. I AM ALSO SENDING AN EMAIL TO THE SCHOOL BOARD WITH OTHER INFORMATION.
THIS IS A JIGSAW PUZZLE WITH PIECES MISSING.
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
The high school districts in option 3 will not evenly distribute the students and will end with Southview receiving more students then Northview and thereby either A. receiving more resources then then Northview or B. Southview and Northview will receive the same amount of resources and the students at Southview will be disadvantaged. Option 1 has the better long term distribution plan.
D
Danielle M Schullo
9 years ago
Hoping & praying for option 1. My child will have to ride on the bus for only God knows how long and spend so much of her day on the bus. I already worry enough about what goes on, on the short bus ride she currently has to take. Option 3 makes 0 sense!
C
Celeste Konecny
9 years ago
I have 2 kids in the Sylvania school system and feel that option 3 makes no sense!!!
A
Aimee Klink
9 years ago
As an educator and a Sylvania schools parent Option 3 is not a viable option. It involves too much transition and long commutes for some of the youngest students.
M
Melissa
9 years ago
Save Maplewwod!
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
While keeping Maplewood students together, somewhere Whiteford was put on the back burner. Most of my daughters friends will be split up if option 3 is approved. Not to mention, my daughter that will start kindergarten this up coming school year will be moved to a different school the very next year. Its all just very confusing.
G
Gillian Carte
9 years ago
Option 3 is a terrible solution too much chaos for the kids
R
Rob Best
9 years ago
Anything this complicated is probably a bad idea. Keep it Simple. Re-draw neighboring school districts where one school is out pacing the other. No need for all this shuffling of grades and schools. And absolutely not a dime more to these schools than what is already allocated! Maplewood is less than 10 years old for crying out loud!!
My son is second grade and I do not want his schooling disrupted.
No to option No. 3!
Strongly oppose this option
No on option 3. This option no longer makes any sense to maplewood people and you know what I mean by now. Not a long term fix and really displaces maplewood families. It's not a safe idea to move elementary kids that far away from their homes. They forget stuff and traffic back and forth in that area is a mess.
No to option 3! My grandchildren will lose their precious elementary across the street to be bused across town! My children bought in Sylvania because they trusted you to make smart decisions for my grandchildren. Option 3 is a waste of tax dollars on a brand new school and outrageously long bus rides across the district, precious time and money wasted! Studies show too many transitions hurt adolescents. 4 for most Sylvania kids and 5 for my own kids! They should only have three schools. Don't fix what's not broken using tax dollars unnecessarily while causing harm to our youth! Good luck passing another levy when you make crucial decisions putting our students and our home values in harm's way. Option 1 for Sylvania!
Option 3 keeps our grandchildren from going to the school across the street. No to long commutes. How is this saving on busing?
$100,000....who's paying for that? Not a great plan to keep future levies passing. Us 'empty nesters ' who had 4 kids graduate from Sylvania schools and have/will have 13+ grandkids in the Highland area are not fans of option 3.
I am concerned about the switching of so many schools. I do not have a child in Maplewood but I think this option will have a negative effect on that neighborhood.
Demar
When i saw this i was absolutely blown away. I am infuriated that this would actually become a thing. Many good people will be put out of work.
Do not take Maplewood from the local community. Too far to bus elementary kids across town.
FIRST OF ALL OPTION 3 IS NOT AN OPTION. BELOW ARE JUST SOME REASONS: I HAVE LIVED ONLY ONE MILE DOWN THE ROAD FROM TIMBERSTONE FOR THE PAST 17 YEARS. MY SON WAS THE FIRST 6TH GRADE CLASS AT TIMBERSTONE. FEEDER SCHOOLS WERE PROPORTIONATELY DRAWN TO VARIOUS ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, JUNIOR HIGHS AND HIGH SCHOOLS. THIS WAS LOGICAL REDISTRICTING. SOCIOECONOMICS WAS S ALSO CONSIDERED IN DISTRICTING LINES DRAWN, STUDENTS STARTING SYLVANIA SCHOOLS NOW WILL HAVE TO CHANGE SCHOOLS 4 (SOME 5) TIMES IN K THRU 12. MY GRANDSONS ARE CURRENTLY ATTENDING MAPLEWOOD ELEMENTARY LIVING ONLY 4 HOUSES AWAY FROM THE SCHOOL. THE ABOVE IS NOT ALL OF MY MESSAGE. I AM ALSO SENDING AN EMAIL TO THE SCHOOL BOARD WITH OTHER INFORMATION. THIS IS A JIGSAW PUZZLE WITH PIECES MISSING.
The high school districts in option 3 will not evenly distribute the students and will end with Southview receiving more students then Northview and thereby either A. receiving more resources then then Northview or B. Southview and Northview will receive the same amount of resources and the students at Southview will be disadvantaged. Option 1 has the better long term distribution plan.
Hoping & praying for option 1. My child will have to ride on the bus for only God knows how long and spend so much of her day on the bus. I already worry enough about what goes on, on the short bus ride she currently has to take. Option 3 makes 0 sense!
I have 2 kids in the Sylvania school system and feel that option 3 makes no sense!!!
As an educator and a Sylvania schools parent Option 3 is not a viable option. It involves too much transition and long commutes for some of the youngest students.
Save Maplewwod!
While keeping Maplewood students together, somewhere Whiteford was put on the back burner. Most of my daughters friends will be split up if option 3 is approved. Not to mention, my daughter that will start kindergarten this up coming school year will be moved to a different school the very next year. Its all just very confusing.
Option 3 is a terrible solution too much chaos for the kids
Anything this complicated is probably a bad idea. Keep it Simple. Re-draw neighboring school districts where one school is out pacing the other. No need for all this shuffling of grades and schools. And absolutely not a dime more to these schools than what is already allocated! Maplewood is less than 10 years old for crying out loud!!