It does not mean more high school drivers because those high school students are already driving to their neighborhood high school. |
On the high scchool level? Yes and yes. |
A free bus that is nowhere near where you live and goes nowhere near your school is not very helpful. |
Some are and some aren't. The one thing that is absolutely clear is that there would be more teen drivers on the roads if they revise boundaries every five years and then phase in each set of changes through grandfathering without transportation. |
I’m not following your logic. Most of the kids stop taking the school bus and start driving asap. These kids are driving anyway, they don’t use the cheese wagon as we so lovingly called it in high school. |
What I am seeing is that some folks in my neighborhood group are against the grandfathering amendment, and they have cited "divide and conquer" as the reason. I am both for changing the policy to allow grandfathering (as it should have been the case from the beginning) and pushing back against this round of of boundary changes. Are you against the grandfathering amendment? If so, why? Are you worried that it will dilute the backlash against the current round of boundary changes if there is a safety net for high school students? |
It's funny how you generalize from your own experience to the entire county. But, hey, the School Board depends on enablers like you, so post away. |
I am in favor of a grandfathering amendment, but only with a commitment to providing transportation for grandfathered students. Without such a commitment, we're favoring wealthier students with access to cars or drivers over other students, which is inequitable, and the opposition to objectively unnecessary boundary changes will be more muted. It indeed appears to be a "divide and conquer" strategy by the School Board. |
GTFO, it is anything but clear on that point. But if you’d care to enlighten us how that sentence is somehow very clear whether the amendment applies across the board or just to KAA, please enlighten us. We’ll wait. |
It doesn’t really sound like you were going to stay in the fight anyway, and instead are using a random post on an anonymous forum as pretext to bail. |
DP. Here's the language relating to HS boundary adjustments: High Schools: When a boundary adjustment occurs at the high school level, attendance in the new school boundary shall be mandatory for incoming 9th grade students. Students in grades 10-12 shall be given the option to remain at their current school or attend the school in the new boundary. These allowances shall not be applicable in the opening of a new school, or in the closing of an existing school. I think this is clear that, for the type of boundary adjustments that Thru Consulting has been proposing, the intent would be that all rising 9th graders would attend the new school, and students in grades 10-12 would have a choice to either attend the new school or stay at their current schools. It's fairly obvious that a student in grades 10-12 could remain at their current school through graduation, although there's some ambiguity as to whether they'd need to make a one-time election the first year or could make a different choice in subsequent years. The policy is completely silient with respect to transportation, so folks would be left guessing, until there is further clarification, as to whether FCPS would provide transportation to students' current schools. The last sentence seems to speak to situations like KAA, since KAA would be a "new school" for FCPS. FCPS would make a separate decision specific to the reopening of KAA as an FCPS school at a later date. Going by the practice in other jurisdictions, it's unlikely KAA would have any seniors its first year. FCPS might decide that all 9th through 11th graders rezoned to KAA should attend the school, or they might decide that all 9th and 10th graders rezoned to KAA should attend the school, and 11th graders might be able to elect to stay at their current schools or attend KAA. But the only thing that's clear is that, for a new school like KAA, FCPS wouldn't commit in advance to grandfather students in grades 10-12 by giving them an option to attend either their current schools or KAA. |
What’s with the name calling? Argue the point, not the person. |
That is the point: PP is making a broad, yet inaccurate, generalization based on her own observation. It's been pointed out by others that it's not universally the case that "everyone" in grades 10-12 drives, yet she ignores this and repeats the lie. It's back to the same type of School Board shilling we saw months ago. |
Wanting to see grandfathering for HS kids does not mean I have “taken up the cause” of boundary changes. Being less vehemently opposed to something does not = supporting it. |
Yes. If you are generalizing then you haven’t had any high school drivers yet. My 4th is a rising junior and no license yet. And when she does, no car and no spot in the lot. I’ve had a senior need to take the bus before. It is simply not true that every licensed teen has a car and access to a safe parking spot or rides with friends. |