FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Right, if fcps actually cared about academic equity, the exact same courses offered in
person at Langley would also be taught in person at Justice.

Justice has a large number of wealthy kids too--from those posh lakeside villas. So there might be a critical mass for the same number of high level AP classes at Justice as there are at Langley. But not sure about Annandale or Lewis.

Of course the high numbers of high achieving students don't correlate exactly with wealth. Other demographic factors play a role as well. A school can't offer multiple sections of AP Calculus BC if no one signs up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Posters now confirming the fear aspect. Admitting that large ESL populations are the root cause of not wanting to attend certain schools. Makes schools less desirable and the education is not up to par. Well, that traces through all levels of government. It just so happens that the touch points for residents are the schools and their children.

Holy shit, this is a really racist take from the extreme left faction of the county. Not everything is about race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From another thread (on contacting the School Board):

"Look, you and I are largely aligned ideologically, but I will never vote for a D in an FCPS SB election again. They hid their boundary review intentions during their campaigns, ignored their constituents to cram it through, and are hurrying the process to try to avoid blowback in 2027 (it won’t work).

As much as I don’t want all the things that you mention might come with an R on the school board, I’d rather those than having the school board look at my kid as their resource to paper over a poor performing school. All the R stuff I can discuss and contextualize with my kid. I can’t discuss away them having to leave their friends and have a significantly altered education because the school board felt the need to pick winners and losers based on zip code.

"

This is the evidence of people fearing being zoned to the high ESL population schools.

I wrote that, and you are absolutely wrong. You want the county to engage in a grand social experiment using our kids as your lab rats.

It’s quite clear from the community feedback to date that you are in the minority when it comes to believing that kids should be moved to satisfy your quota.

But don’t take my word for it, look at the status of the Democratic brand in our country. You’re turning off a ton of moderates with your ill-informed posts.

But why is it such a grand social experiment? Ask yourself that? How did FCPS get to the point where people are so fearful of attending certain schools?

It is because the schools have become very different - because immigration was uncontrolled due to bad policy and lack of enforcement. And those students have ended up concentrated in certain schools. These are the facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From another thread (on contacting the School Board):

"Look, you and I are largely aligned ideologically, but I will never vote for a D in an FCPS SB election again. They hid their boundary review intentions during their campaigns, ignored their constituents to cram it through, and are hurrying the process to try to avoid blowback in 2027 (it won’t work).

As much as I don’t want all the things that you mention might come with an R on the school board, I’d rather those than having the school board look at my kid as their resource to paper over a poor performing school. All the R stuff I can discuss and contextualize with my kid. I can’t discuss away them having to leave their friends and have a significantly altered education because the school board felt the need to pick winners and losers based on zip code.

"

This is the evidence of people fearing being zoned to the high ESL population schools.

I wrote that, and you are absolutely wrong. You want the county to engage in a grand social experiment using our kids as your lab rats.

It’s quite clear from the community feedback to date that you are in the minority when it comes to believing that kids should be moved to satisfy your quota.

But don’t take my word for it, look at the status of the Democratic brand in our country. You’re turning off a ton of moderates with your ill-informed posts.

But why is it such a grand social experiment? Ask yourself that? How did FCPS get to the point where people are so fearful of attending certain schools?

It is because the schools have become very different - because immigration was uncontrolled due to bad policy and lack of enforcement. And those students have ended up concentrated in certain schools. These are the facts.

Moderate Democrat here. It would take a lot to get me to vote for a republican candidate in todays political environment. I am not electing someone who is likely to rubber stamp the Trump agenda. Since pretty much 0 Republicans have been willing to speak out against Trump or vote opposite of the party line, I can't vote Republican because I won't vote for people who will rubber stamp unconstitutional practices.

Not to mention, the Republican party keeps running candidates who are even more damaging then the Democrats. Which sucks but that is where I stand.

I'll vote, like a lot of parents in the county, by pupil placing my kid into a better school, that offers the classes that he will want to take. Others are voting by going to private school.

As for the idea that they just start boundary review from scratch, why not? Remove the boundaries. Lay out the ES boundaries first, with the goal of keeping schools at 90% capacity. Lay out the MS boundaries next and then the HS. I would bet that the vast majority of the county would be at the same ES, MS, and HS. The changes would be at the schools that need it most. Some of those are changes that people are fighting, like moving to Lewis and moving to Herndon, but most people will stay where they are. Just like most people are staying where they are now. The loudest voices in this thread are the parents who don't want to move to schools like Lewis and Herndon from schools like WSHS and Langley for the obvious reasons, no one wants to move from a school with a large group of kids focused on college to a school where most of the kids are not focused on college. The offered classes are different, and the community feel is different.

I know people who have had a great experience at Herndon, you can get a great education there. The teachers are excellent and the kids I know have enjoyed their time there. But they had fewer AP choices then a kid at Oakton, McLean, Chantilly, or Langley. The club choices are different. It is not because the kids are bad or dangerous but because the focus of the families is different. Ignoring that and calling people who want their kids to attend a school with more AP options and more academic club options racist is ridiculous. Moving MC and UMC families to SLHS improved test scores only because you moved kids who have parents focused on education and who participated in the IB program. There is 0 indication that the test scores for the ELL and FARMs kids have improved. The test score incrase looks good but it only masks the societal issues that schools cannot fix associated with generational poverty and immigration from impoverished countries with limited educational opportunities for their citizens.






\

[Anonymous]

I tend to discount anyone’s viewpoint who claims that it’d be fine to draw boundaries from scratch while simultaneously saying that they’ll just pupil place their kid.

It’s the sentiment of, I’ll game the system a particular way, but I want to cause massive disruption to families across the county. Again, it’s a real social experiment gamble. All of the comprehensive boundary review is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right, if fcps actually cared about academic equity, the exact same courses offered in
person at Langley would also be taught in person at Justice.

Justice has a large number of wealthy kids too--from those posh lakeside villas. So there might be a critical mass for the same number of high level AP classes at Justice as there are at Langley. But not sure about Annandale or Lewis.

Of course the high numbers of high achieving students don't correlate exactly with wealth. Other demographic factors play a role as well. A school can't offer multiple sections of AP Calculus BC if no one signs up.

They can offer one section, with 5 kids. But FCPS doesn't let them offer classes until they can fill them with 30+ students. That's not equity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From another thread (on contacting the School Board):

"Look, you and I are largely aligned ideologically, but I will never vote for a D in an FCPS SB election again. They hid their boundary review intentions during their campaigns, ignored their constituents to cram it through, and are hurrying the process to try to avoid blowback in 2027 (it won’t work).

As much as I don’t want all the things that you mention might come with an R on the school board, I’d rather those than having the school board look at my kid as their resource to paper over a poor performing school. All the R stuff I can discuss and contextualize with my kid. I can’t discuss away them having to leave their friends and have a significantly altered education because the school board felt the need to pick winners and losers based on zip code.

"

This is the evidence of people fearing being zoned to the high ESL population schools.

I wrote that, and you are absolutely wrong. You want the county to engage in a grand social experiment using our kids as your lab rats.

It’s quite clear from the community feedback to date that you are in the minority when it comes to believing that kids should be moved to satisfy your quota.

But don’t take my word for it, look at the status of the Democratic brand in our country. You’re turning off a ton of moderates with your ill-informed posts.

But why is it such a grand social experiment? Ask yourself that? How did FCPS get to the point where people are so fearful of attending certain schools?

It is because the schools have become very different - because immigration was uncontrolled due to bad policy and lack of enforcement. And those students have ended up concentrated in certain schools. These are the facts.

Moderate Democrat here. It would take a lot to get me to vote for a republican candidate in todays political environment. I am not electing someone who is likely to rubber stamp the Trump agenda. Since pretty much 0 Republicans have been willing to speak out against Trump or vote opposite of the party line, I can't vote Republican because I won't vote for people who will rubber stamp unconstitutional practices.

Not to mention, the Republican party keeps running candidates who are even more damaging then the Democrats. Which sucks but that is where I stand.

I'll vote, like a lot of parents in the county, by pupil placing my kid into a better school, that offers the classes that he will want to take. Others are voting by going to private school.

As for the idea that they just start boundary review from scratch, why not? Remove the boundaries. Lay out the ES boundaries first, with the goal of keeping schools at 90% capacity. Lay out the MS boundaries next and then the HS. I would bet that the vast majority of the county would be at the same ES, MS, and HS. The changes would be at the schools that need it most. Some of those are changes that people are fighting, like moving to Lewis and moving to Herndon, but most people will stay where they are. Just like most people are staying where they are now. The loudest voices in this thread are the parents who don't want to move to schools like Lewis and Herndon from schools like WSHS and Langley for the obvious reasons, no one wants to move from a school with a large group of kids focused on college to a school where most of the kids are not focused on college. The offered classes are different, and the community feel is different.

I know people who have had a great experience at Herndon, you can get a great education there. The teachers are excellent and the kids I know have enjoyed their time there. But they had fewer AP choices then a kid at Oakton, McLean, Chantilly, or Langley. The club choices are different. It is not because the kids are bad or dangerous but because the focus of the families is different. Ignoring that and calling people who want their kids to attend a school with more AP options and more academic club options racist is ridiculous. Moving MC and UMC families to SLHS improved test scores only because you moved kids who have parents focused on education and who participated in the IB program. There is 0 indication that the test scores for the ELL and FARMs kids have improved. The test score incrase looks good but it only masks the societal issues that schools cannot fix associated with generational poverty and immigration from impoverished countries with limited educational opportunities for their citizens.
\

You and all the other people like you are the problem. Limousine liberals that vote for destructive policies and then game their way out of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From another thread (on contacting the School Board):

"Look, you and I are largely aligned ideologically, but I will never vote for a D in an FCPS SB election again. They hid their boundary review intentions during their campaigns, ignored their constituents to cram it through, and are hurrying the process to try to avoid blowback in 2027 (it won’t work).

As much as I don’t want all the things that you mention might come with an R on the school board, I’d rather those than having the school board look at my kid as their resource to paper over a poor performing school. All the R stuff I can discuss and contextualize with my kid. I can’t discuss away them having to leave their friends and have a significantly altered education because the school board felt the need to pick winners and losers based on zip code.

"

This is the evidence of people fearing being zoned to the high ESL population schools.

I wrote that, and you are absolutely wrong. You want the county to engage in a grand social experiment using our kids as your lab rats.

It’s quite clear from the community feedback to date that you are in the minority when it comes to believing that kids should be moved to satisfy your quota.

But don’t take my word for it, look at the status of the Democratic brand in our country. You’re turning off a ton of moderates with your ill-informed posts.

But why is it such a grand social experiment? Ask yourself that? How did FCPS get to the point where people are so fearful of attending certain schools?

It is because the schools have become very different - because immigration was uncontrolled due to bad policy and lack of enforcement. And those students have ended up concentrated in certain schools. These are the facts.

Moderate Democrat here. It would take a lot to get me to vote for a republican candidate in todays political environment. I am not electing someone who is likely to rubber stamp the Trump agenda. Since pretty much 0 Republicans have been willing to speak out against Trump or vote opposite of the party line, I can't vote Republican because I won't vote for people who will rubber stamp unconstitutional practices.

Not to mention, the Republican party keeps running candidates who are even more damaging then the Democrats. Which sucks but that is where I stand.

I'll vote, like a lot of parents in the county, by pupil placing my kid into a better school, that offers the classes that he will want to take. Others are voting by going to private school.

As for the idea that they just start boundary review from scratch, why not? Remove the boundaries. Lay out the ES boundaries first, with the goal of keeping schools at 90% capacity. Lay out the MS boundaries next and then the HS. I would bet that the vast majority of the county would be at the same ES, MS, and HS. The changes would be at the schools that need it most. Some of those are changes that people are fighting, like moving to Lewis and moving to Herndon, but most people will stay where they are. Just like most people are staying where they are now. The loudest voices in this thread are the parents who don't want to move to schools like Lewis and Herndon from schools like WSHS and Langley for the obvious reasons, no one wants to move from a school with a large group of kids focused on college to a school where most of the kids are not focused on college. The offered classes are different, and the community feel is different.

I know people who have had a great experience at Herndon, you can get a great education there. The teachers are excellent and the kids I know have enjoyed their time there. But they had fewer AP choices then a kid at Oakton, McLean, Chantilly, or Langley. The club choices are different. It is not because the kids are bad or dangerous but because the focus of the families is different. Ignoring that and calling people who want their kids to attend a school with more AP options and more academic club options racist is ridiculous. Moving MC and UMC families to SLHS improved test scores only because you moved kids who have parents focused on education and who participated in the IB program. There is 0 indication that the test scores for the ELL and FARMs kids have improved. The test score incrase looks good but it only masks the societal issues that schools cannot fix associated with generational poverty and immigration from impoverished countries with limited educational opportunities for their citizens.

You and all the other people like you are the problem. Limousine liberals that vote for destructive policies and then game their way out of them.

+1. It's the NIMBY problem over...and over...and over again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From another thread (on contacting the School Board):

"Look, you and I are largely aligned ideologically, but I will never vote for a D in an FCPS SB election again. They hid their boundary review intentions during their campaigns, ignored their constituents to cram it through, and are hurrying the process to try to avoid blowback in 2027 (it won’t work).

As much as I don’t want all the things that you mention might come with an R on the school board, I’d rather those than having the school board look at my kid as their resource to paper over a poor performing school. All the R stuff I can discuss and contextualize with my kid. I can’t discuss away them having to leave their friends and have a significantly altered education because the school board felt the need to pick winners and losers based on zip code.

"

This is the evidence of people fearing being zoned to the high ESL population schools.

I wrote that, and you are absolutely wrong. You want the county to engage in a grand social experiment using our kids as your lab rats.

It’s quite clear from the community feedback to date that you are in the minority when it comes to believing that kids should be moved to satisfy your quota.

But don’t take my word for it, look at the status of the Democratic brand in our country. You’re turning off a ton of moderates with your ill-informed posts.

But why is it such a grand social experiment? Ask yourself that? How did FCPS get to the point where people are so fearful of attending certain schools?

It is because the schools have become very different - because immigration was uncontrolled due to bad policy and lack of enforcement. And those students have ended up concentrated in certain schools. These are the facts.

Moderate Democrat here. It would take a lot to get me to vote for a republican candidate in todays political environment. I am not electing someone who is likely to rubber stamp the Trump agenda. Since pretty much 0 Republicans have been willing to speak out against Trump or vote opposite of the party line, I can't vote Republican because I won't vote for people who will rubber stamp unconstitutional practices.

Not to mention, the Republican party keeps running candidates who are even more damaging then the Democrats. Which sucks but that is where I stand.

I'll vote, like a lot of parents in the county, by pupil placing my kid into a better school, that offers the classes that he will want to take. Others are voting by going to private school.

As for the idea that they just start boundary review from scratch, why not? Remove the boundaries. Lay out the ES boundaries first, with the goal of keeping schools at 90% capacity. Lay out the MS boundaries next and then the HS. I would bet that the vast majority of the county would be at the same ES, MS, and HS. The changes would be at the schools that need it most. Some of those are changes that people are fighting, like moving to Lewis and moving to Herndon, but most people will stay where they are. Just like most people are staying where they are now. The loudest voices in this thread are the parents who don't want to move to schools like Lewis and Herndon from schools like WSHS and Langley for the obvious reasons, no one wants to move from a school with a large group of kids focused on college to a school where most of the kids are not focused on college. The offered classes are different, and the community feel is different.

I know people who have had a great experience at Herndon, you can get a great education there. The teachers are excellent and the kids I know have enjoyed their time there. But they had fewer AP choices then a kid at Oakton, McLean, Chantilly, or Langley. The club choices are different. It is not because the kids are bad or dangerous but because the focus of the families is different. Ignoring that and calling people who want their kids to attend a school with more AP options and more academic club options racist is ridiculous. Moving MC and UMC families to SLHS improved test scores only because you moved kids who have parents focused on education and who participated in the IB program. There is 0 indication that the test scores for the ELL and FARMs kids have improved. The test score incrase looks good but it only masks the societal issues that schools cannot fix associated with generational poverty and immigration from impoverished countries with limited educational opportunities for their citizens.

You and all the other people like you are the problem. Limousine liberals that vote for destructive policies and then game their way out of them.

+1. It's the NIMBY problem over...and over...and over again.

Without us limousine liberals, your party won’t win. Don’t ever forget that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be easier to just create new boundaries across the county. Start as if no boundaries exist and see what they get , adjust to make the numbers make sense and present that.

🤣 This process has been a disaster from the start, so let’s do something that disrupts ten times the number of students?

You aren’t a serious person.

A redraw from scratch was the original plan.

PP's suggestion would just be going back to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be easier to just create new boundaries across the county. Start as if no boundaries exist and see what they get , adjust to make the numbers make sense and present that.

🤣 This process has been a disaster from the start, so let’s do something that disrupts ten times the number of students?

You aren’t a serious person.

A redraw from scratch was the original plan.

PP's suggestion would just be going back to that.

They are not going back to that. That would involve ticking off one of their wealthier, organized groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be easier to just create new boundaries across the county. Start as if no boundaries exist and see what they get , adjust to make the numbers make sense and present that.

🤣 This process has been a disaster from the start, so let’s do something that disrupts ten times the number of students?

You aren’t a serious person.

A redraw from scratch was the original plan.

PP's suggestion would just be going back to that.

They are not going back to that. That would involve ticking off one of their wealthier, organized groups.

We all know who (as usual) will emerge unscathed, but their impulse to meddle means they'll still screw things up for some people, as otherwise they'll have nothing to show for their "transformative" boundary project.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be easier to just create new boundaries across the county. Start as if no boundaries exist and see what they get , adjust to make the numbers make sense and present that.

🤣 This process has been a disaster from the start, so let’s do something that disrupts ten times the number of students?

You aren’t a serious person.

A redraw from scratch was the original plan.

PP's suggestion would just be going back to that.

They are not going back to that. That would involve ticking off one of their wealthier, organized groups.

We all know who (as usual) will emerge unscathed, but their impulse to meddle means they'll still screw things up for some people, as otherwise they'll have nothing to show for their "transformative" boundary project.

So you want them to screw over some of your neighbors? I mean, do you want boundary changes or not? You’re very inconsistent here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From another thread (on contacting the School Board):

"Look, you and I are largely aligned ideologically, but I will never vote for a D in an FCPS SB election again. They hid their boundary review intentions during their campaigns, ignored their constituents to cram it through, and are hurrying the process to try to avoid blowback in 2027 (it won’t work).

As much as I don’t want all the things that you mention might come with an R on the school board, I’d rather those than having the school board look at my kid as their resource to paper over a poor performing school. All the R stuff I can discuss and contextualize with my kid. I can’t discuss away them having to leave their friends and have a significantly altered education because the school board felt the need to pick winners and losers based on zip code.

"

This is the evidence of people fearing being zoned to the high ESL population schools.

I wrote that, and you are absolutely wrong. You want the county to engage in a grand social experiment using our kids as your lab rats.

It’s quite clear from the community feedback to date that you are in the minority when it comes to believing that kids should be moved to satisfy your quota.

But don’t take my word for it, look at the status of the Democratic brand in our country. You’re turning off a ton of moderates with your ill-informed posts.

But why is it such a grand social experiment? Ask yourself that? How did FCPS get to the point where people are so fearful of attending certain schools?

It is because the schools have become very different - because immigration was uncontrolled due to bad policy and lack of enforcement. And those students have ended up concentrated in certain schools. These are the facts.

Moderate Democrat here. It would take a lot to get me to vote for a republican candidate in todays political environment. I am not electing someone who is likely to rubber stamp the Trump agenda. Since pretty much 0 Republicans have been willing to speak out against Trump or vote opposite of the party line, I can't vote Republican because I won't vote for people who will rubber stamp unconstitutional practices.

Not to mention, the Republican party keeps running candidates who are even more damaging then the Democrats. Which sucks but that is where I stand.

I'll vote, like a lot of parents in the county, by pupil placing my kid into a better school, that offers the classes that he will want to take. Others are voting by going to private school.

As for the idea that they just start boundary review from scratch, why not? Remove the boundaries. Lay out the ES boundaries first, with the goal of keeping schools at 90% capacity. Lay out the MS boundaries next and then the HS. I would bet that the vast majority of the county would be at the same ES, MS, and HS. The changes would be at the schools that need it most. Some of those are changes that people are fighting, like moving to Lewis and moving to Herndon, but most people will stay where they are. Just like most people are staying where they are now. The loudest voices in this thread are the parents who don't want to move to schools like Lewis and Herndon from schools like WSHS and Langley for the obvious reasons, no one wants to move from a school with a large group of kids focused on college to a school where most of the kids are not focused on college. The offered classes are different, and the community feel is different.

I know people who have had a great experience at Herndon, you can get a great education there. The teachers are excellent and the kids I know have enjoyed their time there. But they had fewer AP choices then a kid at Oakton, McLean, Chantilly, or Langley. The club choices are different. It is not because the kids are bad or dangerous but because the focus of the families is different. Ignoring that and calling people who want their kids to attend a school with more AP options and more academic club options racist is ridiculous. Moving MC and UMC families to SLHS improved test scores only because you moved kids who have parents focused on education and who participated in the IB program. There is 0 indication that the test scores for the ELL and FARMs kids have improved. The test score incrase looks good but it only masks the societal issues that schools cannot fix associated with generational poverty and immigration from impoverished countries with limited educational opportunities for their citizens.

You and all the other people like you are the problem. Limousine liberals that vote for destructive policies and then game their way out of them.

+1. It's the NIMBY problem over...and over...and over again.

I would suggest that the lack of moderates in the republican party who were willing to take a stand against the right wing of the Republican party and who now bow to Donald Trump are the problem. If you think that it is a problem that there are Democrats unwilling to elect someone who is going to blindly support a wanna be dictator, then maybe get off your butt and tell the Republican party to actually grow a backbone. I am not giving Trump another vote in Congress, and I am not voting for a school board candidate whose agenda is banning books and attacking the 1% of the population that is trans.

Run candidates that are focused on real education issues and not the far-right social agenda, which I find abhorrent. But when the Republican candidates are only focused on MAGA agenda talking points, you are not getting my vote. As much as I don't want to vote for the candidates put forward by the Democrats. I don't know how many Democrats have to tell the Republican trolls on this board that same message.

Run moderates who are moderate and act on moderate policies and you will win. But when I research said person, I better not find their other website that is focused on 1950's cultural norms that were damaging then and flat out offensive today. It shouldn't be hard for you. The problem is that it is hard because anyone who is moderate in the Republican party is chased out by the MAGA fringe.

And yes, my family is in a position where we can find a solution that works for us. It sucks for the families that don't have that option, but I am not sacrificing my kid by voting for the MAGA agenda. That agenda is more offensive to me then the progressive agenda. I'll pick my poison but would love for someone to offer up some nice refreshing, calming lemonade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be easier to just create new boundaries across the county. Start as if no boundaries exist and see what they get , adjust to make the numbers make sense and present that.

🤣 This process has been a disaster from the start, so let’s do something that disrupts ten times the number of students?

You aren’t a serious person.

A redraw from scratch was the original plan.

PP's suggestion would just be going back to that.

They are not going back to that. That would involve ticking off one of their wealthier, organized groups.

We all know who (as usual) will emerge unscathed, but their impulse to meddle means they'll still screw things up for some people, as otherwise they'll have nothing to show for their "transformative" boundary project.

So you want them to screw over some of your neighbors? I mean, do you want boundary changes or not? You’re very inconsistent here.

Obviously not, but they make calculated decisions as to who they can get away with screwing over. And that always means leaving one particular area alone while others get torched.