FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

If they truly wanted to save transportation costs they would stop bussing kids all over the county to AAP center schools when their home school has level 4. For instance my kids walk to school but if we wanted we could choose to be bused to the center school 10 minutes away. Until this goes away a 2-9 minute savings on time for a handful of buses at most isn’t an argument

DP. Regardless of transportation costs and commuting times, one assumes they may also be looking at getting kids at McLean and Marshall out of temporary classrooms, which could involve moving kids from those schools to Langley and Langley kids to Herndon.

Yep. This is the dominion effect of McLean having no where east nor south to expand. Building McLean, Langley and Marshall so close to each other has really backfired geographically. Langley will have to absorb McLean’s overcapacity which only further cuts part of Great Falls to Herndon.

Heck yeah! They made a huge mistake when they built Langley and Marshall so close to McLean. Those planners back in 1962 and 1965 were just straight up morons. How could they not envision demographics in these areas 60+ years later?

Anyway, as we’ve discussed before, those attendance islands could be moved to Langley and Falls Church to solve the McLean issue without overcrowding either school. I’m not advocating for that to happen, just saying that your domino effect theory is just propaganda.

All predictions on this thread for sure. But just looking at 2026-2030 CIP capacities for ALL schools shows the need for western migration. We are SO landlocked by Arlington and the Potomac to make any improvements within the beltway without this.

Timber Lane island going to Falls Church - get the popcorn ready.

The 2026-2030 CIP capacity projections are essentially worthless in light of:

- the trump administration’s reshaping the federal workforce,

- the “ripple effect” on adjacent private companies in FFX, and

- the local immigration crackdown (and indirect effect of driving people away, even if they are not personally detained or removed).

The boundary adjustment must be paused for a year.

I’ve said it before but if people frame these issues as if they are supportive of DOGE and the crackdown on immigrants they will only strengthen the resolve of the SB to see itself as part of the “resistance” and, yes, go ahead and change boundaries.

It typically comes across as opportunistic, rather than fact-driven.

[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:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

If they truly wanted to save transportation costs they would stop bussing kids all over the county to AAP center schools when their home school has level 4. For instance my kids walk to school but if we wanted we could choose to be bused to the center school 10 minutes away. Until this goes away a 2-9 minute savings on time for a handful of buses at most isn’t an argument

DP. Regardless of transportation costs and commuting times, one assumes they may also be looking at getting kids at McLean and Marshall out of temporary classrooms, which could involve moving kids from those schools to Langley and Langley kids to Herndon.

Yep. This is the dominion effect of McLean having no where east nor south to expand. Building McLean, Langley and Marshall so close to each other has really backfired geographically. Langley will have to absorb McLean’s overcapacity which only further cuts part of Great Falls to Herndon.

Heck yeah! They made a huge mistake when they built Langley and Marshall so close to McLean. Those planners back in 1962 and 1965 were just straight up morons. How could they not envision demographics in these areas 60+ years later?

Anyway, as we’ve discussed before, those attendance islands could be moved to Langley and Falls Church to solve the McLean issue without overcrowding either school. I’m not advocating for that to happen, just saying that your domino effect theory is just propaganda.

All predictions on this thread for sure. But just looking at 2026-2030 CIP capacities for ALL schools shows the need for western migration. We are SO landlocked by Arlington and the Potomac to make any improvements within the beltway without this.

Timber Lane island going to Falls Church - get the popcorn ready.

The 2026-2030 CIP capacity projections are essentially worthless in light of:

- the trump administration’s reshaping the federal workforce,

- the “ripple effect” on adjacent private companies in FFX, and

- the local immigration crackdown (and indirect effect of driving people away, even if they are not personally detained or removed).

The boundary adjustment must be paused for a year.

I’ve said it before but if people frame these issues as if they are supportive of DOGE and the crackdown on immigrants they will only strengthen the resolve of the SB to see itself as part of the “resistance” and, yes, go ahead and change boundaries.

It typically comes across as opportunistic, rather than fact-driven.

I’m not sure I follow how they would read these statements as being supportive of DOGE. All I’ve heard is that people don’t want boundary uncertainty piled on top of job uncertainty and DC region uncertainty. That’s not supportive of DOGE, that’s advocating for stability for families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How are people finding out specifically what schools are up for grabs? Is if conjecture or is there info somewhere?

Conjecture. An educated guess based on the School Boards comments. I can fully see some of the border shifts that are being discussed, they fit with what the school board has laid out as their reasoning for redistricting.

But there is a lot of fear mongering with the hope that if the groups raise the alarm and FOIAing documents and pointing out how awful the school board is people will place pressure on the school board. This is coming from the same schools with the same posters. I would love to see an analysis of what percent of posters are responsible for the conversation in this topic. I suspect that a relativly small number of posters are responsible for the lions share of the posts.

Anyone who sees pros, to go along with the cons, is shouted down by the people who are violently opposed to any changes that moves their kids. There have been some good suggestions made in the topics, but they are hard to find.

I fully expect there to be large shifts in the Herndon, Centerville, Chantilly, South Lakes, Oakton, Westfield area because of the issues with over crowding and space available in some of the schools. The ES situation is problematic, and those shifts will affect MS and HS. That has been touched on a bit but for the most part the loudest voices have been the Great Falls and WSHS families.

FCPS is too big and really should be broken into smaller districts, but I doubt that is going to happen.

I think the opposition is fanning this flame - they keep bringing up Langley and Herndon all the time. It just creates a response. No where was that discussed in any meeting. But - there they are saying it will happen because of equity. The county, in their view, will pay extra, drive longer distances, just to bus people from GF Village all the way to HHS. Going after trans was the last election, CRT the one before, now it's equity driven boundary change.

From Forestville, 2 minutes longer to cooper than HMS. From Forestville, 9 minutes longer to Langley than HHS. Don’t take my word for it. Check on maps at relevant times of the day.

The narrative about transportation savings is a chimera.

That 9 minutes is significant if they are trying to save costs via bus. It’s not just traveling TO Langley, but also the time it takes to get to those neighborhoods potentially out of route.

DP. You know what's a lot more significant? The wasted almost empty buses that traverse the county to take AAP kids to centers - when they already have AAP in their base school. THAT'S not only grossly wasteful and redundant, but also the very definition of INequity. I certainly hope the SB gets rid of centers and their associated busing before moving a single child to a new school.

Agreed! AAP centers should be the first thing to cut when there is a budget shortfall. That includes the elementary school specialists who work with 3 kids a day and give a lesson once a month.

Do you think the AART only visits your kid's class once per month, and not the rest of the school? Think deeper, dingbat. Say there are four classes per grade on average -- that's 28 visits per month and multiple pull-outs per grade from 2-6. Plus dealing with disgruntled parents desperate to get their kids in AAP while simultaneously trashing it and calling for AARTs to be canned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

[Anonymous]

Cutting AAP and AARTs will only accelerate the departures of families who have options. Many families move to Fairfax for AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

[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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

One of the exemptions is if the student is unable to walk due to distance; they are not required if the pupil lives close enough. The other two exemptions are disabled or homeless.

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

[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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

Policies not tethered to any ordinance or statute are easily changed. This seems to fall in that category.

Correct. VA law says the SB may, but does not have to provide transportation. FCPS policy says they shall, and would need to be amended if they were to stop providing transportation to in boundary students. It would be another incredibly unpopular move, but they could change the policy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

One of the exemptions is if the student is unable to walk due to distance; they are not required if the pupil lives close enough. The other two exemptions are disabled or homeless.

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Thanks for the additional information. I cannot see them changing this, though, for Great Falls because it has an impact on other schools, as well.

[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:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

This is from FCPS website. I could not find official rules. I think the prior post must come from the state. I'm still trying to find the FCPS official policy.

"We provide transportation to students who live in the designated attendance area of a particular school, usually beyond the approved walking distance of one mile for elementary and 1.5 miles for secondary students. Transportation is required for certain students with special needs, as defined by federal law."

Daily school bus service shall be provided for all elementary students living in excess of one mile from school and for middle and high school students living in excess of one and one-half miles from school.

https://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/legacy-content/867SGC2A80C4/$FILE/P8610.pdf

What does it say about high school and middle school students?

Honestly, high school rezoning is what most people are actually upset about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:what the hell is a family vision meeting

She also discussed bringing homework to all grades. And something about the middle school after programs.

And, yet, chooses to ignore the parent responses at the regional BRAC input.

From fair facts matters:


“While speaking about the BRAC, Dr. Reid gave me the impression that she truly would like this process to be as minimally disruptive as possible...but there are problems that need to be solved. One of the areas she alluded to as important is fixing transportation issues.

To that end, one of the solutions she mentioned was having a pyramid where a school boundary change won't be made, but FCPS will only provide bussing within a certain radius of that school.

As one would expect, her communication was opaque but I was encouraged by the thought process and possible creative problem-solving.”

Rather ambiguous. So they don't change the boundaries but they just stop providing transportation to families on the outer fringe of the boundary?

Don't see this passing the smell test.

It won't. She was likely just trying to throw them a carrot to shut them up.

Why wouldn’t it? It saves transportation costs by eliminating routes altogether. Posters talk about saving from 2 minute shorter bus routes, saving 20 minutes is ten times those savings!!!

Pretty sure that it is law that FCPS must provide transportation to in boundary students.

It's actually not.

Chapter 12. Pupil Transportation.
Article 1. General Provisions.
§ 22.1-176. Transportation of pupils authorized; when fee may be charged; contributions; regulations of Board of Education.
A. School boards may provide for the transportation of pupils, but nothing herein contained shall be construed as requiring such transportation except as provided in § 22.1-221.

And provision 22.1-221 relates to transportation for special education students.

So, no, FCPS is not required by law to provide transportation to most students.

Source of this? Federal, state, or county?

That is Virginia. VDOE links to Virginia Law Chapter 70. Regulations Governing Pupil Transportation
https://www.doe.virginia.gov/programs-services/school-operations-support-services/pupil-transportation/regulations
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/admincode/title8/agency20/chapter70/

FCPS program budget has a section transportation. FCPS SY 2025 is the most recent program budget. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/FY-2025-Program-Budget.pdf Scroll down the table of content to Division wide centrally managed services to get to Transportation. Click on page numbers to get the costs:

1. Transportation HS academies 5.7m
2. AAP - ES + MS 8.1 m. Insight: Deep dive into transfers for elementary AAP centers shows some transportation provided for very few students. A comment on a boundary review meeting stated 8 kids from Great Falls got a bus to the AAP center. Sounds like Great Falls Elementary to Colvin Run? It's not and appears to be in boundary Forestville ES to Forest Edge which shows up a 1 on the transfer data. 1 means <10. Great Falls ES sends 41 to Colvin Run - AAP transfer in to CRES is 28. FCPS no matter the center location will always get greater out on GFES - alot depends on the negative impacts from JIP.

3. Contract services -SPED-IEP driven so not relevant
4. ES magnet sites- 2 or 3 for Baileys split .523m. Number served 188. Prior year .579m number served 295. Insight:
Baileys Lower transfer in <10 magnet. 160 FLI
Baileys Lower transfer in <10 magnet. 101 FLI
Hunters Woods transfers in: 251 magnet, 69 AAP. AAP feed is Waples Mill which sends a total of 98 to Hunters Woods so I guess all jump on the AAP bus whereas at least 153 others from 20 plus schools.

So what's the cost split on the .523m? FCPS doesn't bother to inform the public. Those transfer numbers show Baileys is not functioning as a magnet.

What we do know is that Dunne wants to set up the Bucknell Montessorri magnet for West Potomac pyramid only. Federal grants for magnets exclude using the money for transportation and the grants expire. Federal grants refer to LEA- the whole division not an actificial construct within a division lie a pyramid or region.
That grant would stick Bucknell base school Montessori opt out on the Stratford Landing AAP bus. That's a very definitive move that FCPS intends to retain elementary AAP centers. Same for the Coates/Parklawn studies including centers.

There would be no charge for pre K Montessori. Arlington VA pre K Montessori is widely referenced in the FCPS grant application.

ARL charges tuition based on income https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2024/08/School-Year-2024-2025-Annual-Tuition-Fees-1.pdf

5..Late Runs: combines MS+HS 3.7m
6.Transport reg-preK-12 : 179m
7. TJ: 1.5m and no offsetting revenue from other jurisdictions. Serves 1370 FX county only. If ARL can charge a fee for Montessori pre K based on income why can't FCPS charge a fee under VA Law for TJ and /or TJ transportation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cutting AAP and AARTs will only accelerate the departures of families who have options. Many families move to Fairfax for AAP.

AAP today is what Gen Ed was 10 years ago. Everything has been “dumbed down”. FCPS is in free fall. Boundary study just accelerates the crash.