Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Yeah and Daventry had a low number too when they petitioned to move from Lewis to WSHS. SB approved it and school age population in the area shot up. Which is one reason why WSHS is crowded now. They shouldn’t move anyone else into WSHS boundary if there moving other kids out. Also it’s not fair to Lewis.

You absolutely cannot compare Daventry and that cluster of townhomes with 20 kids.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone is watching the phase 2 meeting at Robinson, they had three split feeders...surprise, surprise they kept all three as split feeders in the pyramid.

Ooh.

Dish more please

Right now a parent is railing against adding Rolling Valley to WSHS

...Oh, and add a 4th spilt feeder they did not fix (so they fixed zero split feeders). They did close one attendance island.

Interesting.

The Thru consultant looked annoyed at her and basically blew her off, cause she spitballed a number of kids that could go to WSHS from those 200 townhomes. The consultant didn't answer why they added that neighborhood to WSHS.

It was priority 7 from Region 6.

So they ignored priorities 1-6 and went with this one? Wow, okay.

No. I’m pretty sure they incorporated those too.

This was recommendation number 6: "Adjust boundaries to increase enrollment at Lewis to address overcrowding. Community members pointed out that Lewis is
underutilized and suggested that boundaries be adjusted to better utilize Lewis and increase socioeconomic diversity."

Apologies, they seemed to have incorporated all of the specific changes. If Lewis had listed specific neighborhoods they wanted, THRU probably would have given them to them.

Lewis families and anyone else from the lower SES schools seemingly missed the boat. If COVID hadn’t happened, the boundary changes would have started and then gone through in 2020-2021, when the political climate was totally different. There would have 100% been equity moves at that point.

Ok sure.
But what is being done, they seem to entirely have ignored Lewis. It's underenrolled while others are over capacity. They just....pretended it doesn't exist?

Lewis doesn’t have boundary issues. Lewis has progamming issues. Drop IB and do full AP and attendance will come back.

It is shocking though that FCPS moved 200 upper middle class Rolling Valley homes out of Lewis to WSHS.

Stop spreading these lies. There are possibly 100 townhomes in that small area. And that’s generous.

You are yelling at multiple posters.

We all have access to Google Maps.

Before you insult people, you might want to google a bit.

I admit I first thought it was only a couple Rolling Valley/Lewis houses, until I looked at Google maps and compared it to the boundary tool.

Bentley Village Drive: 22 Townhouses

Spring Forest Court: 14 townhouses

Jillspring Court 30 townhouses

Tanworth Drive 21 townhouses

Tanworth Court 29 townhouses

Readington Court 21 townhouses

Kousa Lane 8 townhousrs

Stream Way 76 townhouses

Whitlers Creek Dr 25 townhouses

Squirrel Run Court. 12 townhouses

Squirrel Run Road 24 townhouses


Unless my math is wrong, the total Lewis zoned homes getting rezoned to WSHS is 282 townhouses, much more than 200 homes and far more than that 100 number

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Yeah and Daventry had a low number too when they petitioned to move from Lewis to WSHS. SB approved it and school age population in the area shot up. Which is one reason why WSHS is crowded now. They shouldn’t move anyone else into WSHS boundary if there moving other kids out. Also it’s not fair to Lewis.

You absolutely cannot compare Daventry and that cluster of townhomes with 20 kids.

Daventry had fewer than 20 high school students when they were rezoned from Lee to WSHS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Pearls=clutched

Ok, I'm trying to get this all straight. They are moving 99 kids from West Orange Hunt (Sangster) to LB, they bring in 20 kids from Rolling Valley (that seems weirdly low to me that they would have ever had a split feeder with only 20 kids, but let's go with it). So that reduces WS by 79 kids. Where's the rest of the reduction comes from?

The Keene Mill Island to White Oaks. Also, only Rolling Valley north of the parkway is going to WSHS. The rest is moving to Saratoga.

So only 20 kids at Rolling will go to WS and the rest to Saratoga?

That doesn't sound right to me. It would create a worse split feeder. But I don't know that area at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

There are 282 Lewis Rolling Valley homes getting rezoned into WSHS.

By your numbers, that means WSHS is increasing by 32 houses.

[Anonymous]

Homes or students. You all are arguing nine different things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Yeah and Daventry had a low number too when they petitioned to move from Lewis to WSHS. SB approved it and school age population in the area shot up. Which is one reason why WSHS is crowded now. They shouldn’t move anyone else into WSHS boundary if there moving other kids out. Also it’s not fair to Lewis.

You absolutely cannot compare Daventry and that cluster of townhomes with 20 kids.

Sorry, I don't mean to sound difficult, but how can they move only 20 kids from Rolling to WS and the rest to Saratoga? Those numbers seem off to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

There are almost 300 Lewis zoned townhouses in that Rolling Valley neighborhood according to google maps.

There are WAY more than 20 high school students living in that neighborhood.

Sandy Anderson likely just pushed WSHS enrollment to over 290 by rezoning those townhouses to WSHS, even with Sangster leaving for LB

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Pearls=clutched

Ok, I'm trying to get this all straight. They are moving 99 kids from West Orange Hunt (Sangster) to LB, they bring in 20 kids from Rolling Valley (that seems weirdly low to me that they would have ever had a split feeder with only 20 kids, but let's go with it). So that reduces WS by 79 kids. Where's the rest of the reduction comes from?

The Keene Mill Island to White Oaks. Also, only Rolling Valley north of the parkway is going to WSHS. The rest is moving to Saratoga.

So only 20 kids at Rolling will go to WS and the rest to Saratoga?

That doesn't sound right to me. It would create a worse split feeder. But I don't know that area at all

There won’t be a split feeder anymore - the areas that are mostly TH’s north of the parkway will go RV - Irving - WSHS like the rest of Rolling Valley, and the homes south of the parkway will go out of RVES to Saratoga. And they were nominally at Key-Lewis anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

There are 282 Lewis Rolling Valley homes getting rezoned into WSHS.

By your numbers, that means WSHS is increasing by 32 houses.

Go count the areas WSHS lost with the same accuracy you used on the ones it gained. Clearly the PP’s math was wrong so fix both sides of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So WSHS gains 20 Lewis students and loses 173 to Lake Braddock for a net loss of 153 students.

So there is the student shift. The home shift has also been discussed.

No more nonsense posts please.

They are moving almost 300 townhouses into WSHS.

There are way more than 20 high school students living in those homes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Pearls=clutched

Ok, I'm trying to get this all straight. They are moving 99 kids from West Orange Hunt (Sangster) to LB, they bring in 20 kids from Rolling Valley (that seems weirdly low to me that they would have ever had a split feeder with only 20 kids, but let's go with it). So that reduces WS by 79 kids. Where's the rest of the reduction comes from?

The Keene Mill Island to White Oaks. Also, only Rolling Valley north of the parkway is going to WSHS. The rest is moving to Saratoga.

So only 20 kids at Rolling will go to WS and the rest to Saratoga?

It is going to be closer to 100 kids when all the teenagers living in that Rolling Valley neighborhood come back from the schools they pupil placed into and the Catholic high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Yeah and Daventry had a low number too when they petitioned to move from Lewis to WSHS. SB approved it and school age population in the area shot up. Which is one reason why WSHS is crowded now. They shouldn’t move anyone else into WSHS boundary if there moving other kids out. Also it’s not fair to Lewis.

You absolutely cannot compare Daventry and that cluster of townhomes with 20 kids.

Sorry, I don't mean to sound difficult, but how can they move only 20 kids from Rolling to WS and the rest to Saratoga? Those numbers seem off to me.

They are rezoning almkst 300 townhouses to WSHS from Lewis.

The fcps math ain't mathin'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Pearls=clutched

Ok, I'm trying to get this all straight. They are moving 99 kids from West Orange Hunt (Sangster) to LB, they bring in 20 kids from Rolling Valley (that seems weirdly low to me that they would have ever had a split feeder with only 20 kids, but let's go with it). So that reduces WS by 79 kids. Where's the rest of the reduction comes from?

The Keene Mill Island to White Oaks. Also, only Rolling Valley north of the parkway is going to WSHS. The rest is moving to Saratoga.

So only 20 kids at Rolling will go to WS and the rest to Saratoga?

It is going to be closer to 100 kids when all the teenagers living in that Rolling Valley neighborhood come back from the schools they pupil placed into and the Catholic high schools.

And now suddenly those neighborhoods are more attractive to people looking to buy in the area as well. Seriously they should have known this would happen with what happened in the past with Daventry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why bring new areas to WSHS, better keep areas which are already there to minimize disruption, if overcrowding is suddenly not an issue. How does this make any sense?

WSHS LOST over 250 homes. Stop this nonsense you are trying. Same poster. Over and over again talking to yourself.

Can you please get your facts straight? "Homes" are not students. Many people who live in 'homes' don't have kids. What I want to know is exactly how many 'students' they are actually moving from Lewis at Rolling Valley to West Springfield?

If you look at the delta in Lewis enrollment for scenario 4, the answer is 20.

Pearls=clutched

Ok, I'm trying to get this all straight. They are moving 99 kids from West Orange Hunt (Sangster) to LB, they bring in 20 kids from Rolling Valley (that seems weirdly low to me that they would have ever had a split feeder with only 20 kids, but let's go with it). So that reduces WS by 79 kids. Where's the rest of the reduction comes from?

The Keene Mill Island to White Oaks. Also, only Rolling Valley north of the parkway is going to WSHS. The rest is moving to Saratoga.

So only 20 kids at Rolling will go to WS and the rest to Saratoga?

That doesn't sound right to me. It would create a worse split feeder. But I don't know that area at all

There won’t be a split feeder anymore - the areas that are mostly TH’s north of the parkway will go RV - Irving - WSHS like the rest of Rolling Valley, and the homes south of the parkway will go out of RVES to Saratoga. And they were nominally at Key-Lewis anyway.

I think I'm still missing something. At RVES there will be literally only 20 students going to Irving/WSHS and all the rest go to Saratoga?