FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It needs to be paused. Too many changes at once.

The incompetence that FairFACTS Matters has uncovered relating to the selection of BRAC members raises bigger issues as to whether those currently running FCPS and on the School Board could possibly be trusted with fair and valid county-wide boundary changes.

FCPS has never had a more incompetent Superintendent and School Board and they need to pause the boundary study, figure out how to improve their processes, and form a new advisory committee (one where obnoxious School Board shills aren't rewarded with seats for their long history of sucking up to the School Board) before doing any further work.

Fairfax matters discovered a typo on a spreadsheet, maybe. Theres a reason no legitimate new outlet is running that “story” except a local blog.

FairFACTS matters has no credibility. We all saw them at school board meetings. Lying, yelling at kids. Their ambush of Robyn Lady which they've kept up on their YouTube is just a Trainwreck.
The fact that they used Joanne Sears as their parent to interview when SHE HAS NO KIDS IN FCPS and hasn't for years shows that they are desperate and biased.

DP. So, wait a minute. You see nothing wrong with Karl Frisch being part of the SB - and he has no kids at all?? Pretty sure there are other SB members who have no kids either. But do go on about a woman who at least DID have kids in FCPS.

Karl stands up for kids, listens to parents, and knows his policy. He was elected, unlike Sears who spends her time
harassing school board members based on their sexuality and their kids' gender identity. She is the worst troll and can't even get anyone to follow her. Imagine going after people's KIDS!

Karl Frisch is an egregious liar who is just biding his time until he can run for another office. He’s been a complete disaster on the SB and is more than happy to screw taxpayers by wasting over $86 million on a completely unnecessary ES in Dunn Loring - all to save a dog park in Oakton popular with his childless friends.

This is all true, sadly.

Karl really should resign in disgrace.

[Anonymous]

Given delays in boundaries and middle school start times, my prediction is FCPS will decide to waste more $ and roll out the gone pockets to all schools just so they have something to say they ARE doing- won’t matter what any studies or surveys have said, they will roll out.

[Anonymous]

What videos are people referencing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It needs to be paused. Too many changes at once.

The incompetence that FairFACTS Matters has uncovered relating to the selection of BRAC members raises bigger issues as to whether those currently running FCPS and on the School Board could possibly be trusted with fair and valid county-wide boundary changes.

FCPS has never had a more incompetent Superintendent and School Board and they need to pause the boundary study, figure out how to improve their processes, and form a new advisory committee (one where obnoxious School Board shills aren't rewarded with seats for their long history of sucking up to the School Board) before doing any further work.

Fairfax matters discovered a typo on a spreadsheet, maybe. Theres a reason no legitimate new outlet is running that “story” except a local blog.

I see what you did there. What makes a news outlet “legitimate”? Is WaPo “legitimate” under Bezos. Is WTOP legitimate in their “hard hitting” reporting? Would a larger news outlet national (WaPo) or even regional (pick one) outlet report on such a local issue? Or would you expect a local, county news outlet to report on it:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html

Ah, but this particular reporter and this publication has reported on FCPS in the past so this must not be “legitimate.”

That is hilarious. Legitimately hilarious.

Thanks.

I really do not see how anyone can support the current boundary adjustment, given how obviously corrupted and biased the process has been shown to be:

“Scott Jones, a member of the local group FairFACTS Matters, which advocates on education issues, received a copy of the video and other documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by a local father. Parents and community members are now expressing outrage at the sequence of events captured in the video as they watch the segment on social media postings in local neighborhood groups.

The disclosure underscores deeper issues into the integrity, legitimacy, and transparency of the FCPS boundary review committee selection process, which requires members to sign non-disclosure agreements. The documents in the public records request included a file marked “Superintendent’s Boundary Review Committee,” which included a comment from Tracey Wynne, FCPS director of community relations, stating, “Each member has signed a limited non-disclosure agreement (NDA) in order to participate on the committee.”

For Jones, the selection process is “invalid” due to how FCPS officials allegedly mishandled it. He said the incident raises questions about whether FCPS officials intentionally selected only people who would rubber stamp the school district’s remapping of the district.

The public records documents released for the first time revealed all of the committee's members. A Dec. 11 Excel spreadsheet titled “Advisory Committee” includes the names of 87 people in a list marked “Confirmation NDA.” Of those listed, 22 are FCPS employees.

That poster doesn’t care about facts. She’s got her own alternative facts to fit her narrative of unwavering support for corrupt FCPS.

Gaslight much? “That poster,” was me, and you failed to realize I quoted a reputable media source:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html


Question for you PP: You work for FCPS don’t you?

I don't work for FCPS, because I know you will ask and I am not the poster you are responding to.

Fairfax Times is not a reputable source, it is pretty biased in its reporting. And the FairFacts group, or whatever it is call, is pretty biased. I was on the FairFacts FB page for a while and there is a real bias there.

I don't think kids should be moved to rebalnace economic imbalances in the county. I do think that kids need to be moved to decrease enrollment at schools that are over capacity.

I think that IB should be dropped, and students should return to their base schools.

I think that we should be using the existing space that we have instead of expanding capacity at overcrowded schools. I don't think schools udnergoing a renovation should be expanded just because there is a renovation ongoing.

I think that schools that need to be renovated should be renovated, although that is technically a different conversation. It is a legitimate complaint that schools like McLean are falling apart and should be moved up in the renovation cue.

I understand that boundrary changes are disruptive and people don't like them but that doesn't mean there are not valid reasons for doing them. I don't think that FCPS is talking about these shifts for the right reasons, the focus on moving kids to balance FARMs rates in inappropriate. Some kids might be shifted to reduce overcrowding to a school that is a lower FARMs rate because the school closest by has a higher percentage of FARMs kids but a geographic shift possible.

The efforts of the people strongly opposed to redistricting to shut down anyone whose opinion disagrees with theirs is problematic. FCPS didn't need to hrie consultants to do this, they needed maps and people to look at the maps and make adjustments based on relieving overcrowded schools based on geography.

Fairfax Times does meticulous investigative reporting. They broke the Hayfield scandal months before everyone else.

Their issue is that in the midst of their very good reporting, they throw in a bit too much editorial and hyperbole, with a right wing bent. But the reporting is sound, thoroughly researched, and supported by extensive FIOA requests.

They do some of the best investigative reporting anywhere in the area.

If they had a left wing bent, even with the same amount of editorial and hyperbole, you would be falling all over yourself to laud them for their journalism.

Don't let the messenger get in the way of their very valid investigative reporting.

Look beyond your political biases to see the extensive facts behind their reporting.

The Fairfax Times is a reputable, reliable, and accurate source of factual news concerning events in our county.

Fairfax Times is a piece of garbage. Everyone knows. Read it at your peril. Believe the Nomani Times if you have no brain cells.

I found their hayfield reporting very informative, and their recent article about corruption in the boundary review advisory committee was really enlightening.

I mean, how can you explain denying a vocal opponent a seat on BRAC when all of the SB friends received special interest invites?

They will never answer why Woodson, unlike other pyramids, got three BRAC representatives - when it was clearly payback to Hall for years of sucking up to the SB. It’s absurd and they don’t even try to defend the obvious bias.

But that’s just one of the irregularities with the BRAC, which clearly ought to be dissolved and reconstituted.

Agreed. I encourage anyone who hasn’t watched the videos to watch them. They show corruption in the selection process. Don’t take my word for it, go watch the videos yourself.

I watched the video and see an irregularity but not the intentional exclusion of an individual. It would have been helpful if the Fairfax times asked Reid why the sheet had to be redone. Or if they reviewed the foia materials and figured something out. Instead they just quoted fair facts matter which is not a reliable source. It’s full of unhinged people who fully believe conspiracy theories and have one goal - to derail any changes to protect great falls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It needs to be paused. Too many changes at once.

The incompetence that FairFACTS Matters has uncovered relating to the selection of BRAC members raises bigger issues as to whether those currently running FCPS and on the School Board could possibly be trusted with fair and valid county-wide boundary changes.

FCPS has never had a more incompetent Superintendent and School Board and they need to pause the boundary study, figure out how to improve their processes, and form a new advisory committee (one where obnoxious School Board shills aren't rewarded with seats for their long history of sucking up to the School Board) before doing any further work.

Fairfax matters discovered a typo on a spreadsheet, maybe. Theres a reason no legitimate new outlet is running that “story” except a local blog.

I see what you did there. What makes a news outlet “legitimate”? Is WaPo “legitimate” under Bezos. Is WTOP legitimate in their “hard hitting” reporting? Would a larger news outlet national (WaPo) or even regional (pick one) outlet report on such a local issue? Or would you expect a local, county news outlet to report on it:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html

Ah, but this particular reporter and this publication has reported on FCPS in the past so this must not be “legitimate.”

That is hilarious. Legitimately hilarious.

Thanks.

I really do not see how anyone can support the current boundary adjustment, given how obviously corrupted and biased the process has been shown to be:

“Scott Jones, a member of the local group FairFACTS Matters, which advocates on education issues, received a copy of the video and other documents in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by a local father. Parents and community members are now expressing outrage at the sequence of events captured in the video as they watch the segment on social media postings in local neighborhood groups.

The disclosure underscores deeper issues into the integrity, legitimacy, and transparency of the FCPS boundary review committee selection process, which requires members to sign non-disclosure agreements. The documents in the public records request included a file marked “Superintendent’s Boundary Review Committee,” which included a comment from Tracey Wynne, FCPS director of community relations, stating, “Each member has signed a limited non-disclosure agreement (NDA) in order to participate on the committee.”

For Jones, the selection process is “invalid” due to how FCPS officials allegedly mishandled it. He said the incident raises questions about whether FCPS officials intentionally selected only people who would rubber stamp the school district’s remapping of the district.

The public records documents released for the first time revealed all of the committee's members. A Dec. 11 Excel spreadsheet titled “Advisory Committee” includes the names of 87 people in a list marked “Confirmation NDA.” Of those listed, 22 are FCPS employees.

That poster doesn’t care about facts. She’s got her own alternative facts to fit her narrative of unwavering support for corrupt FCPS.

Gaslight much? “That poster,” was me, and you failed to realize I quoted a reputable media source:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html


Question for you PP: You work for FCPS don’t you?

I don't work for FCPS, because I know you will ask and I am not the poster you are responding to.

Fairfax Times is not a reputable source, it is pretty biased in its reporting. And the FairFacts group, or whatever it is call, is pretty biased. I was on the FairFacts FB page for a while and there is a real bias there.

I don't think kids should be moved to rebalnace economic imbalances in the county. I do think that kids need to be moved to decrease enrollment at schools that are over capacity.

I think that IB should be dropped, and students should return to their base schools.

I think that we should be using the existing space that we have instead of expanding capacity at overcrowded schools. I don't think schools udnergoing a renovation should be expanded just because there is a renovation ongoing.

I think that schools that need to be renovated should be renovated, although that is technically a different conversation. It is a legitimate complaint that schools like McLean are falling apart and should be moved up in the renovation cue.

I understand that boundrary changes are disruptive and people don't like them but that doesn't mean there are not valid reasons for doing them. I don't think that FCPS is talking about these shifts for the right reasons, the focus on moving kids to balance FARMs rates in inappropriate. Some kids might be shifted to reduce overcrowding to a school that is a lower FARMs rate because the school closest by has a higher percentage of FARMs kids but a geographic shift possible.

The efforts of the people strongly opposed to redistricting to shut down anyone whose opinion disagrees with theirs is problematic. FCPS didn't need to hrie consultants to do this, they needed maps and people to look at the maps and make adjustments based on relieving overcrowded schools based on geography.

Fairfax Times does meticulous investigative reporting. They broke the Hayfield scandal months before everyone else.

Their issue is that in the midst of their very good reporting, they throw in a bit too much editorial and hyperbole, with a right wing bent. But the reporting is sound, thoroughly researched, and supported by extensive FIOA requests.

They do some of the best investigative reporting anywhere in the area.

If they had a left wing bent, even with the same amount of editorial and hyperbole, you would be falling all over yourself to laud them for their journalism.

Don't let the messenger get in the way of their very valid investigative reporting.

Look beyond your political biases to see the extensive facts behind their reporting.

The Fairfax Times is a reputable, reliable, and accurate source of factual news concerning events in our county.

Fairfax Times is a piece of garbage. Everyone knows. Read it at your peril. Believe the Nomani Times if you have no brain cells.

Um. . . are you OK?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What videos are people referencing?

The video is described in this news article:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html


Essentially:

- FCPS had so many parents volunteer to be part of the boundary change process, they decided to use a “randomizer” to randomly select parents.

When the program chose “parent number 35,” the FCPS folks realized that “number 35” had complained or criticized FCPS in the past, so they decided to exclude her from the boundary process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What videos are people referencing?

The video is described in this news article:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html


Essentially:

- FCPS had so many parents volunteer to be part of the boundary change process, they decided to use a “randomizer” to randomly select parents.

When the program chose “parent number 35,” the FCPS folks realized that “number 35” had complained or criticized FCPS in the past, so they decided to exclude her from the boundary process.

For a committee tasked with drawing the maps for the superintendent, it really is a big scandal to exclude parents who don’t want their kids moved, while at the same time allowing SB friends to be hand-selected through the special interest selections.

A prior poster pretends like this is a fringe viewpoint, but I think most people are generally against corruption in government.

[Anonymous]

Fairfax Times is a piece of garbage. Everyone knows. Read it at your peril. Believe the Nomani Times if you have no brain cells.

So, if you don't like the message, attack the messenger.

Please tell us what was not accurately described.

Then, please tell us where else we can get information. From FCPS website?

Tell us why the members had to sign an NDA.

Tell us why there are several vocal proponents for boundary redrawing on the list, yet none against.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What videos are people referencing?

The video is described in this news article:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html


Essentially:

- FCPS had so many parents volunteer to be part of the boundary change process, they decided to use a “randomizer” to randomly select parents.

When the program chose “parent number 35,” the FCPS folks realized that “number 35” had complained or criticized FCPS in the past, so they decided to exclude her from the boundary process.

For a committee tasked with drawing the maps for the superintendent, it really is a big scandal to exclude parents who don’t want their kids moved, while at the same time allowing SB friends to be hand-selected through the special interest selections.

A prior poster pretends like this is a fringe viewpoint, but I think most people are generally against corruption in government.

Why are special interest groups relevant to be on boundary committee? In same manner, I am always confused when asking about FLE or other matters at FCPS outside 3rd and political parties have say.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What videos are people referencing?

The video is described in this news article:

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/area-residents-ask-what-happened-to-mother-no-35/article_b904ab6c-faac-11ef-9d3c-c3bb6b474982.html


Essentially:

- FCPS had so many parents volunteer to be part of the boundary change process, they decided to use a “randomizer” to randomly select parents.

When the program chose “parent number 35,” the FCPS folks realized that “number 35” had complained or criticized FCPS in the past, so they decided to exclude her from the boundary process.

So is the video oneself posted anywhere or is part of FOIA receipt that cannot disclose it further?

[Anonymous]

It’s on the Fairfactsmatters Facebook page, which is public.

I watched it but don’t think the video on its own really shows anything done wrong, just that there was some kind of problem with 35 on the spreadsheet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s on the Fairfactsmatters Facebook page, which is public.

I watched it but don’t think the video on its own really shows anything done wrong, just that there was some kind of problem with 35 on the spreadsheet.

Why hasn't FCPS responded on this? Or, have they?

[Anonymous]

Ugh, just disband BRAC and issue each scenario biweekly along with a county wide survey and community outreach. Normalize the response per pyramid so one school’s voice doesn’t dominate the whole process.

Just release the scenarios already. I want to see how utterly insane this 6-8 middle school with no renovations proposal is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s on the Fairfactsmatters Facebook page, which is public.

I watched it but don’t think the video on its own really shows anything done wrong, just that there was some kind of problem with 35 on the spreadsheet.

It does seem like most of the pyramid reps are just regular people from the community, chosen at random-ish. I think the outstanding questions and issues that need to be addressed are:

1) they disqualified #35 - why? It really seems like they didn’t want someone on the committee who was a known outspoken opponent to some of the SB goings-on. But under a random selection process, if #35 was chosen, they needed to suck it up and go with it.

2) why were nearly half of the applicants “disqualified?” What was the “problem with the data” or whatever they said happened?

3) we know at least one person was placed on the committee as a community representative but she wasn’t chosen at random. Who else falls under this category?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s on the Fairfactsmatters Facebook page, which is public.

I watched it but don’t think the video on its own really shows anything done wrong, just that there was some kind of problem with 35 on the spreadsheet.

So nothing was done wrong, but at a minimum there was a problem on their spreadsheet?

Do you even know how stupid this makes you (and FCPS) look? If kids are sloppy with their assignments they get downgraded, but FCPS screws up something with greater implications - perhaps on purpose - and you explain it away.

Do the lame excuses for FCPS’s waste and incompetence ever stop? At what point do we demand accountability and the replacement of these bozos?