FFX CNTY Redistricting Option D Board decision

[Anonymous]

Looks like the Board is going to hear the details on the 20th. Check the info here:

http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/southwesternstudy/index.htm

While I do support the concept of closing Clifton ES, it does seem like a bigger challenge at the moment to relocate the kids. I do think the boundary study is providing some much needed district alignment with less attendance islands overall. Still a few neighborhoods out there with enought pull to stay at their preferred school.
Too bad the school board won't take the same intiative and align the MS and HS districts also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Board is going to hear the details on the 20th. Check the info here:

http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/southwesternstudy/index.htm

While I do support the concept of closing Clifton ES, it does seem like a bigger challenge at the moment to relocate the kids. I do think the boundary study is providing some much needed district alignment with less attendance islands overall. Still a few neighborhoods out there with enought pull to stay at their preferred school.
Too bad the school board won't take the same intiative and align the MS and HS districts also.

I'm guessing you don't have kids at Clifton ES, so it's really big of you to support closing the school. This "boundary study" was a joke, but fortunately the idiot who is responsible for this mess - Liz Bradsher - has no political future after this. She has managed to get a middle school built that isn't needed and is now trying to get a school closed in the most overcrowded part of the county. If you don't realize you're being played, I'm sorry for you.

And, in case you don't realize it, the option that will actually be presented to the School Board later this month would dramatically reduce the percentage of lower-income and ESOL students at Poplar Tree, the local school for the area where the School Board Chairman, Kathy Smith, lives. If you think that's a coincidence, I have a bridge to sell you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Board is going to hear the details on the 20th. Check the info here:

http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/southwesternstudy/index.htm

While I do support the concept of closing Clifton ES, it does seem like a bigger challenge at the moment to relocate the kids. I do think the boundary study is providing some much needed district alignment with less attendance islands overall. Still a few neighborhoods out there with enought pull to stay at their preferred school.
Too bad the school board won't take the same intiative and align the MS and HS districts also.

I'm guessing you don't have kids at Clifton ES, so it's really big of you to support closing the school. This "boundary study" was a joke, but fortunately the idiot who is responsible for this mess - Liz Bradsher - has no political future after this. She has managed to get a middle school built that isn't needed and is now trying to get a school closed in the most overcrowded part of the county. If you don't realize you're being played, I'm sorry for you.

And, in case you don't realize it, the option that will actually be presented to the School Board later this month would dramatically reduce the percentage of lower-income and ESOL students at Poplar Tree, the local school for the area where the School Board Chairman, Kathy Smith, lives. If you think that's a coincidence, I have a bridge to sell you.

Look, I get that the parents of Clifton wanted to keep their neighborhood school open. If I were them, I would fight for it, too. But, there were also some good reasons to close it (which you no doubt would agree with me about. Fine.) But, please, Clifton parents have lost a lot of credibility (in all sectors) by how nasty they are being, as well.

In terms of the Study itself, I agree it is highly flawed, was motivated by personal considerations of the school board and the entire thing is a general waste b/c it does NOTHING to solve the overcrowding in the area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Looks like the Board is going to hear the details on the 20th. Check the info here:

http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/southwesternstudy/index.htm

While I do support the concept of closing Clifton ES, it does seem like a bigger challenge at the moment to relocate the kids. I do think the boundary study is providing some much needed district alignment with less attendance islands overall. Still a few neighborhoods out there with enought pull to stay at their preferred school.
Too bad the school board won't take the same intiative and align the MS and HS districts also.

I'm guessing you don't have kids at Clifton ES, so it's really big of you to support closing the school. This "boundary study" was a joke, but fortunately the idiot who is responsible for this mess - Liz Bradsher - has no political future after this. She has managed to get a middle school built that isn't needed and is now trying to get a school closed in the most overcrowded part of the county. If you don't realize you're being played, I'm sorry for you.

And, in case you don't realize it, the option that will actually be presented to the School Board later this month would dramatically reduce the percentage of lower-income and ESOL students at Poplar Tree, the local school for the area where the School Board Chairman, Kathy Smith, lives. If you think that's a coincidence, I have a bridge to sell you.

Look, I get that the parents of Clifton wanted to keep their neighborhood school open. If I were them, I would fight for it, too. But, there were also some good reasons to close it (which you no doubt would agree with me about. Fine.) But, please, Clifton parents have lost a lot of credibility (in all sectors) by how nasty they are being, as well.

In terms of the Study itself, I agree it is highly flawed, was motivated by personal considerations of the school board and the entire thing is a general waste b/c it does NOTHING to solve the overcrowding in the area.

The entire thing is political. Bradsher lives in an HOA type of development near Lorton [area used to go to Hayfield] and her SOCO is actually in the Mt Vernon District. Kathy Smith's area has weird boundaries and I thin k she got additions at Westfield[?] that are not used to capacity.

The low density Clifton area is losing a public community resource. The ONLY public resource for miles that I know of. Whether jealous b1tches like it or not people in Clifton deserve a school. People without kids in that area deserve a local public entity. So what if it's an old building? In a non-HOA world OLD exists.

Clifton area citizens have NOT lost credibility. FCPS has exhibited abuse of power and fiscal irresponsibility. The state should audit all facilities related endeavors and accounts.

[Anonymous]

Wow. Nice response there. Well they do say all politics is local, and the school board is no different.

I happen to think the redistricting of Poplar Tree makes a lot of geographic and transportation sense.

I am sorry that the low density Clifton area will lose their school, but I had a hard time having any sympathy with the posters that comment on it. Good Luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Whether jealous b1tches like it or not people in Clifton deserve a school.

Nice. You may or may not have a case, but you are sure losing the PR part of this fight with your attitude, which smacks of entitlement and is just plain mean and bitter. I'm rapidly losing sympathy for your cause.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Whether jealous b1tches like it or not people in Clifton deserve a school.

Nice. You may or may not have a case, but you are sure losing the PR part of this fight with your attitude, which smacks of entitlement and is just plain mean and bitter. I'm rapidly losing sympathy for your cause.

Please. The people in Clifton worked tirelessly within the system for many months, participating fully in the process and countering on the merits every argument that was advanced in favor of closing to school, only to find out after-the-fact that it was a scam and that Liz Bradsher's pre-determined agenda was to close Clifton in order to free up funds to accelerate the renovation schedule for West Springfield HS. Bradsher had neglected West Springfield for years, because she was getting a middle school built in her own South County neighborhood that is probably not needed, so she had some serious amends to make with the West Springfield folks. Screwing over folks in Clifton was the easiest solution, even though it's patently obvious that closing Clifton makes the overcrowding problem at elementary schools in the southwestern part of the county even worse.

I doubt very much that you'd feel or act any differently had you personally suffered through such a hollow, insulting and time-wasting exercise, but perhaps I'm wrong or perhaps you'll find out on your own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Whether jealous b1tches like it or not people in Clifton deserve a school.

Nice. You may or may not have a case, but you are sure losing the PR part of this fight with your attitude, which smacks of entitlement and is just plain mean and bitter. I'm rapidly losing sympathy for your cause.

Please. The people in Clifton worked tirelessly within the system for many months, participating fully in the process and countering on the merits every argument that was advanced in favor of closing to school, only to find out after-the-fact that it was a scam and that Liz Bradsher's pre-determined agenda was to close Clifton in order to free up funds to accelerate the renovation schedule for West Springfield HS. Bradsher had neglected West Springfield for years, because she was getting a middle school built in her own South County neighborhood that is probably not needed, so she had some serious amends to make with the West Springfield folks. Screwing over folks in Clifton was the easiest solution, even though it's patently obvious that closing Clifton makes the overcrowding problem at elementary schools in the southwestern part of the county even worse.

I doubt very much that you'd feel or act any differently had you personally suffered through such a hollow, insulting and time-wasting exercise, but perhaps I'm wrong or perhaps you'll find out on your own.

I wrote "jealous b1tches" and it is based on the public smackdowns by Bradsher and her HOA pool buddies types as seen in the FOIA info. I have no children in FCPS and DO NOT live anywhere near Bradsher/Smith/Wilson/Storck magisterial districts.

Nor do I have friends or relatives in any of those areas. But dear readers I live in Fairfax County and it is ONE school division. So we all pay for this nonsense. Yes there is a need for boundary adjustments to increase operational efficiency. Losing the Clifton capacity creates a problem. I've been through boundary wars.

[Anonymous]

Some of you are proving my point with the Clifton folks losing credibility (and appearing nasty and bitter, to boot).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are proving my point with the Clifton folks losing credibility (and appearing nasty and bitter, to boot).

First of all, you don't know who lives in Clifton and who doesn't. I don't, but I find the conduct of Liz Bradsher, Tessie Wilson and their cronies absolutely reprehensible. People can still have a rooting interest in good government when they aren't affected quite as directly as the Clifton parents.

Second, if you'd read even a fraction of the inarticulate, rambling, and utterly narcissistic e-mails that Liz Bradsher penned, you'd surely be more concerned with her lack of credibility than the credibility of any parent in the Clifton district.

[Anonymous]

Will someone please educate me? I'm a parent of kids at Greenbriar West, which will be effected in some way by this redistricting. My family will stay at the school no matter what, but many of our kids' friends will be leaving (and just about our entire PTA) and going to Poplar Tree. Some parents with an older kid at our school (due to the AAP program) will now have to take their youngest to Poplar Tree (if they aren't in AAP) and the oldest to GBW - which are on different bell schedules. I understand changes have to happen, but I hope in the end that all of the changes in these kids' lives are for a greater, long-term, good. Right now I don't see that.

What I don't understand is what impact the closing of Clifton has to do with this? Is the redistricting a result of the diaspera of the Clifton kids? Are Clifton parents trying to reverse the decision to close the school by somehow weighing in on this current boundary study? I've heard whispers like "The latest proposal is a Clifton parent's ploy" - but what does that mean, if anything?

Clearly I don't understand the larger dynamic going on here. I'm disappointed that so much politicing is involved in decisions that greatly impact these kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of you are proving my point with the Clifton folks losing credibility (and appearing nasty and bitter, to boot).

First of all, you don't know who lives in Clifton and who doesn't. I don't, but I find the conduct of Liz Bradsher, Tessie Wilson and their cronies absolutely reprehensible. People can still have a rooting interest in good government when they aren't affected quite as directly as the Clifton parents.

Second, if you'd read even a fraction of the inarticulate, rambling, and utterly narcissistic e-mails that Liz Bradsher penned, you'd surely be more concerned with her lack of credibility than the credibility of any parent in the Clifton district.

First of all, I do, actually. I have many friends there, I live nearby and have many, many friends who are teachers and are intimately familiar with the situation there. That said, I don't see what that has to do with anything.

As for Bradsher, et. al, I could not agree more that they have behaved atrociously. I've read the emails. I think that most of the SW Study is preordained and that -despite my participation in it- it is an empty exercise b/c the decisions have already been made. So, I share your concern, outrage, etc.

But, look at the posts of Clifton parents (here and other boards). They "deserve" a school? "Jealous bitches?" That isn't even the worse I've seen. I don't begruge them fighting for their local school. I'd probably do the same (and am as I do not like the impact of this study on my child's Elem). But, there is an entitlement in the Clifton parents' position that many find distasteful. People can disagree or not with the merits of closing that school (I don't really have a position on it other than if they are going to close a school they need to add capacity elsewhere and they don't seem to be doing that effectively). But the perception of that position is there. And it doesn't work to their advantage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think that most of the SW Study is preordained and that -despite my participation in it- it is an empty exercise b/c the decisions have already been made.

Admittedly my comment is off-topic, but a similar pre-ordained "solution" is in place for the Lacey et al Annandale study.

[Anonymous]

Just to completely derail things , do you know and care to share the pre-ordained solution to the Lacey study?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
First of all, I do, actually. I have many friends there, I live nearby and have many, many friends who are teachers and are intimately familiar with the situation there. That said, I don't see what that has to do with anything.

As for Bradsher, et. al, I could not agree more that they have behaved atrociously. I've read the emails. I think that most of the SW Study is preordained and that -despite my participation in it- it is an empty exercise b/c the decisions have already been made. So, I share your concern, outrage, etc.

But, look at the posts of Clifton parents (here and other boards). They "deserve" a school? "Jealous bitches?" That isn't even the worse I've seen. I don't begruge them fighting for their local school. I'd probably do the same (and am as I do not like the impact of this study on my child's Elem). But, there is an entitlement in the Clifton parents' position that many find distasteful. People can disagree or not with the merits of closing that school (I don't really have a position on it other than if they are going to close a school they need to add capacity elsewhere and they don't seem to be doing that effectively). But the perception of that position is there. And it doesn't work to their advantage.

You can know people in Clifton and not know whether a particular post on an unmoderated internet forum calling someone a "bitch" was made by a Clifton parent, a Clifton sympathizer, or a Clifton opponent who actually wants to demonize them by passing themselves off as an unhinged person who lives there.

We could certainly debate whether it's a good PR strategy to suggest that your neighborhood school is being closed to export your high-achieving children to other schools with lower scores, even if it turned out to be true. But I think it only plays into the likes of Liz Bradsher to have that debate now, when the energy really ought to be focused on putting this School Board under a microscope and challenging their processes and decisions.