APS: Think the "no move" campaign is going to work?

[Anonymous]

School Board members say it would help to hear from more parents who do not support the no moves proposals.

It was interesting last night that the main objectors were Key and Madison Manor, couple ATS. Not broadly from McKinley, nor ATS. Claremont doesn’t seem to think that Immersion is under attack.

Multiple other schools spoke up to oppose the No Moves idea. They represent many more students than Key. And there are many more Latinx students who do not attend Key and many more economically disadvantaged kids countywide. We need more parents speaking up for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:School Board members say it would help to hear from more parents who do not support the no moves proposals.

It was interesting last night that the main objectors were Key and Madison Manor, couple ATS. Not broadly from McKinley, nor ATS. Claremont doesn’t seem to think that Immersion is under attack.

Multiple other schools spoke up to oppose the No Moves idea. They represent many more students than Key. And there are many more Latinx students who do not attend Key and many more economically disadvantaged kids countywide. We need more parents speaking up for them.

Or maybe they just don't care because it isn't really a problem.

[Anonymous]

We are relatively new to Arlington and have a daughter who is not quite old enough for elementary school. All of this just seems like short term solutions to a long term problem. Is there ever stability or should we expect this turmoil year after year if no one is taking steps to address the long term problem of not having enough seats?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are relatively new to Arlington and have a daughter who is not quite old enough for elementary school. All of this just seems like short term solutions to a long term problem. Is there ever stability or should we expect this turmoil year after year if no one is taking steps to address the long term problem of not having enough seats?

For nearly 10 years now, APS has been growing faster than any school system could manage. There are long-term plans to build out the additional capacity we need, but that takes time because there’s only so much money in a given year and the process of identifying a site, developing plans, getting necessary approvals and then constructing the building takes about five years. In the meantime, yes, there will be periodic changes to rebalance capacity because growth isn’t entirely predictable and isn’t consistent across the county.

APS policy is to review boundaries at each school level once every five years, and as much as possible to not move any students (who remain in the same planning unit) more than once during their time at a given school level. So it’s possible your child will end up changing schools due to rezoning at some point during her school career, but it doesn’t happen every year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Neighborhood Key will be integrated because of the neighborhood, Immersion at ATS will be integrated because of the location and program, and ATS at McKinley will be waaay more diverse than neighborhood McKinley. Moving schools creates an additional diverse neighborhood school vs no moves.

Escuela Key is already diverse, ATS is already diverse. Drawing boundaries across Rt 50 could make McKinley diverse. No need to do this "lego block" shuffling and move 3 schools in the process.

No, it won’t. This is how I know you’re a NA parent. Do you even know how far S those boundaries would have to go to get any kids who aren’t UMC? Past Campbell ES, 8 city blocks S of Rt. 50. And, you’d have to bypass the entirety of PUs around Kenmore and N of Campbell, because there isn’t any income diversity there. If it were this simple, staff would’ve done it long ago (look at their representative map, is that a reasonable boundary?!?). Same problems exist as you move E along Rt. 50. The neighborhoods just south of Rt. 50 are some of the higher income PUs in SA. You can’t scoop them up and send them N without negatively affecting the income diversity for SA neighborhood schools. If anything, you’d need to send NA kids just N of 50 to SA in order to move towards more similar demographics, with the exception of the PUs in and around Buckingham.

We need SB members who will take on the challenge and drag NA students into SA schools kicking and screaming. All of the current SB members are closet republicans. Who is running on a truly progressive platform that will implement the equity our families deserve?

You do yourself no favors when you talk of dragging kids somewhere to attain “the equity our families deserve.”

[Anonymous]

Only a small faction of the "Save McKinley" group remains and continues the fight. The rest of us (majority) have accepted the likelihood that our school will close to us and we will be redistricted to Reed or another nearby N Arl school, bussed or walked. No biggie. Time to move on to make sure APS knows how to rebalance school populations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are relatively new to Arlington and have a daughter who is not quite old enough for elementary school. All of this just seems like short term solutions to a long term problem. Is there ever stability or should we expect this turmoil year after year if no one is taking steps to address the long term problem of not having enough seats?

Turmoil. Honestly. APS is a system in chaos right now. I don't know how our neighbors are in comparison. APS stuffed kids into every available space for a decade and put trailers everywhere they could go, thinking it was a bubble that would pass. It wasn't and it didn't and here we are now with no good options and more kids coming. Unless it gets so crappy that families like yours give up and move elsewhere.

Knowing what I know now, I might not have fought to stay in Arlington when my kids were little and homes were cheaper elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:School Board members say it would help to hear from more parents who do not support the no moves proposals.

It was interesting last night that the main objectors were Key and Madison Manor, couple ATS. Not broadly from McKinley, nor ATS. Claremont doesn’t seem to think that Immersion is under attack.

Multiple other schools spoke up to oppose the No Moves idea. They represent many more students than Key. And there are many more Latinx students who do not attend Key and many more economically disadvantaged kids countywide. We need more parents speaking up for them.

They always say this when there's a big decision they don't want to make, like they would actually make a bold decision if they heard from more supporters than naysayers -- that's the excuse they can rely on when they fail to make the decisions they know they should be making but just dont want to upset the people who spoke out so strongly. See? We didnt hear as much support as opposition; so the community doesn't want us to do this! SB, here's some news for you: if it were the community's decision, you wouldn't be on a school board. you were elected to make decisions in the best interest of the school system. Do. your. job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only a small faction of the "Save McKinley" group remains and continues the fight. The rest of us (majority) have accepted the likelihood that our school will close to us and we will be redistricted to Reed or another nearby N Arl school, bussed or walked. No biggie. Time to move on to make sure APS knows how to rebalance school populations.

Agreed...McKrazy seems to have given up...and Data Dude seems to have lost his mojo. It is kind of like the end of a game when you are down 30 points - just throw in the towel. This APS goose is almost cooked.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think and NW Es can be surprised by McKinley being part of the proposal. If you didn’t pay attention to the walk
Zone for Reed, than I guess it was surprisingly. But when APS showed what on first pass they deemed walkable to Reed and it was over 300 McKinley kids and barely any from other schools (and that’s just full planning units) it was easy to see where it would all lead. How could McKinley loose just under 400 students and be McKinley, that’s what many parents of neighborhood schools near by and paying attention wondered.

[Anonymous]

APS staff proposal had supporters (or folks not opposed ) representing that vast majority of the county when compared to those speaking for the no moves folks.

[Anonymous]

Weren't there PTA reps speaking behalf of entire school PTAs last night? If that isn't enough support for the SB, they have no backbone. If they cave on this, I hope Gladys, Lisa and Sarah quit en masse and go somewhere where they are appreciated. Enough already. This SB will be run out of town if they don't pass this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only a small faction of the "Save McKinley" group remains and continues the fight. The rest of us (majority) have accepted the likelihood that our school will close to us and we will be redistricted to Reed or another nearby N Arl school, bussed or walked. No biggie. Time to move on to make sure APS knows how to rebalance school populations.

Agreed...McKrazy seems to have given up...and Data Dude seems to have lost his mojo. It is kind of like the end of a game when you are down 30 points - just throw in the towel. This APS goose is almost cooked.

Not cool to call people names on this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only a small faction of the "Save McKinley" group remains and continues the fight. The rest of us (majority) have accepted the likelihood that our school will close to us and we will be redistricted to Reed or another nearby N Arl school, bussed or walked. No biggie. Time to move on to make sure APS knows how to rebalance school populations.

Agreed...McKrazy seems to have given up...and Data Dude seems to have lost his mojo. It is kind of like the end of a game when you are down 30 points - just throw in the towel. This APS goose is almost cooked.

Not cool to call people names on this forum.

Would it be better to use their real names?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only a small faction of the "Save McKinley" group remains and continues the fight. The rest of us (majority) have accepted the likelihood that our school will close to us and we will be redistricted to Reed or another nearby N Arl school, bussed or walked. No biggie. Time to move on to make sure APS knows how to rebalance school populations.

Agreed...McKrazy seems to have given up...and Data Dude seems to have lost his mojo. It is kind of like the end of a game when you are down 30 points - just throw in the towel. This APS goose is almost cooked.

Not cool to call people names on this forum.

Would it be better to use their real names?

Only if the post authors use theirs.