Any updates on Mclean/Langley possible redistricting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the “renovation” of McLean in 2005 cost around $10 million.

Langley’s recent renovation - which including adding seats that were needed more at McLean than at Langley - cost about $80 million.

And now they are budgeting over $35 million to expand West Potomac and $130 million to renovate Falls Church.

Some of that money should be reallocated to McLean. If Tholen and Frisch can’t make that happen, they should be recalled.

Those two can't do it alone. You at least need at-large and Omeish really wants those "lily white" schools broken up. She's unlikely to support any action that doesn't lead to that outcome. Keys Gamarra can probably be counted on to blow with the wind, and Sizemore is probably indifferent.

Race is not the issue here. Both Langley and McLean are FAR from being “lily white” (is that still a term that people use?). The wealth is there though. Extremely low farm rates.

Langley and McLean parents know our schools aren't "lily white" but Omeish agreed with that characterization, and that people only pupil place into these schools to get away from kids who aren't.

I think you are referring to the cranky old guy from Reston who used the phrase “lily white” to describe Langley in an interview with Omeish before the election. She kind of went along with him, but I’m not sure she was agreeing with him so much as humoring him.

I think she could be an ally, at least if she wants to fulfill her pledge to keep students first in her decision-making. Kids don’t want to be crammed into a school, but neither do they want to be forced to change schools.

Not sure about the other at-large members. Rachna was very solicitous of Langley and McLean families before the election but has largely deferred to Elaine since then. KKG can’t be trusted; she’ll do whatever she thinks plays best at the time. And none of it affects her Sully neighborhood, as Madison is getting a big addition and Oakton is getting a huge renovation and expansion.

Some of us think that going along with racially inflammatory language is not okay.

She kicked off her campaign with a speech about how important it is to change the boundaries, and not because there are capacity issues.

+1
Her intentions - and that of the other SB members - are to adjust boundaries (read: bus kids for miles past their neighborhood schools) for the sole purpose of “diversifying” schools. Anyone who voted for her should be ashamed if they’re now complaining they don’t agree with this plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When Langley had more kids and South Lakes was under-enrolled, Langley made darn sure it stayed out of that boundary study. But some Langley parents have a hard time accepting that McLean families might want to stay there or ask FCPS to add space there like it has done elsewhere. If FCPS ends up hurting McLean to justify all the seats added at Langley, it won’t bother them one bit.

Really not sure what you’re babbling about. Of course McLean should be expanded. But until they are, they have to do something about the overcrowding there. What would you suggest? More trailers? Sane people with no axe to grind agree that changing the McLean/Langley boundary is a good first step. What do you mean, “hurting McLean”? The obvious immediate solution is to move some kids to the closest school with space - which happens to be Langley. Get over yourself.

You sound like an arrogant ass with no compassion for others. This obviously isn’t going to have the same impact on Langley families as on McLean families.

It’s “arrogant” to say that while waiting for FCPS to get its act together and expand McLean, a great way to alleviate McLean’s overcrowding is to adjust the boundaries and send some neighborhoods to Langley? Ok. You’re right. You guys should just have to suffer with your hideously overcrowded school until FCPS sees fit to build an addition at McLean. Could be awhile, but sure, you just keep up the whining and victim act. Good luck to you.

Yes, it’s arrogant of you to keep suggesting that McLean families should eagerly embrace the opportunity to move to Langley, when Langley parents have always fought to keep their own kids there and resisted any boundary changes to reassign Langley students, even when Langley was overcrowded (and not under-enrolled as it is now).

Believe it or not, even with the trailers, we still love the school, prefer McLean to Langley, and view any boundary change as a necessary evil that’s a result of poor planning by FCPS. And even if our own neighborhoods end up among those reassigned, we want to make sure FCPS does right by McLean, so that it remains a strong school in the future - and doesn’t see its academic and extra-curricular programs gutted just to fill empty seats at a school further away, in an area where more people turn up their noses at public schools and send their kids to privates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently the “renovation” of McLean in 2005 cost around $10 million.

Langley’s recent renovation - which including adding seats that were needed more at McLean than at Langley - cost about $80 million.

And now they are budgeting over $35 million to expand West Potomac and $130 million to renovate Falls Church.

Some of that money should be reallocated to McLean. If Tholen and Frisch can’t make that happen, they should be recalled.

Those two can't do it alone. You at least need at-large and Omeish really wants those "lily white" schools broken up. She's unlikely to support any action that doesn't lead to that outcome. Keys Gamarra can probably be counted on to blow with the wind, and Sizemore is probably indifferent.

Race is not the issue here. Both Langley and McLean are FAR from being “lily white” (is that still a term that people use?). The wealth is there though. Extremely low farm rates.

Langley and McLean parents know our schools aren't "lily white" but Omeish agreed with that characterization, and that people only pupil place into these schools to get away from kids who aren't.

I think you are referring to the cranky old guy from Reston who used the phrase “lily white” to describe Langley in an interview with Omeish before the election. She kind of went along with him, but I’m not sure she was agreeing with him so much as humoring him.

I think she could be an ally, at least if she wants to fulfill her pledge to keep students first in her decision-making. Kids don’t want to be crammed into a school, but neither do they want to be forced to change schools.

Not sure about the other at-large members. Rachna was very solicitous of Langley and McLean families before the election but has largely deferred to Elaine since then. KKG can’t be trusted; she’ll do whatever she thinks plays best at the time. And none of it affects her Sully neighborhood, as Madison is getting a big addition and Oakton is getting a huge renovation and expansion.

Let's get our magisterial districts in order. Keyes Gamara is at large and most likely resides in Hunter Mill [Reston and Vienna and Oakton]. Sully and Oakton have had a strong defender in Tholen, Dranesville. Rachna has not focused on the basic spreadsheet that could be done on capacity. Fritsch is not going to be squashed by the Queen Bees from Mount Vernon and Lee. At larges aren't once again doing their elected jobs.

Add up capacity and deduct enrollment. Then see where you need more if contiguous areas can't absorb overflow via boundary changes.

Keys Gamarra lives in Sully. She ran for the School Board seat there in 2015 and lost to Tom Wilson by a narrow margin before winning the at-large vacancy in 2017 after Jeannette Hough quit.

It is too early to say with any confidence how most of the new members will behave over the next four years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When Langley had more kids and South Lakes was under-enrolled, Langley made darn sure it stayed out of that boundary study. But some Langley parents have a hard time accepting that McLean families might want to stay there or ask FCPS to add space there like it has done elsewhere. If FCPS ends up hurting McLean to justify all the seats added at Langley, it won’t bother them one bit.

Really not sure what you’re babbling about. Of course McLean should be expanded. But until they are, they have to do something about the overcrowding there. What would you suggest? More trailers? Sane people with no axe to grind agree that changing the McLean/Langley boundary is a good first step. What do you mean, “hurting McLean”? The obvious immediate solution is to move some kids to the closest school with space - which happens to be Langley. Get over yourself.

You sound like an arrogant ass with no compassion for others. This obviously isn’t going to have the same impact on Langley families as on McLean families.

It’s “arrogant” to say that while waiting for FCPS to get its act together and expand McLean, a great way to alleviate McLean’s overcrowding is to adjust the boundaries and send some neighborhoods to Langley? Ok. You’re right. You guys should just have to suffer with your hideously overcrowded school until FCPS sees fit to build an addition at McLean. Could be awhile, but sure, you just keep up the whining and victim act. Good luck to you.

Yes, it’s arrogant of you to keep suggesting that McLean families should eagerly embrace the opportunity to move to Langley, when Langley parents have always fought to keep their own kids there and resisted any boundary changes to reassign Langley students, even when Langley was overcrowded (and not under-enrolled as it is now).

Believe it or not, even with the trailers, we still love the school, prefer McLean to Langley, and view any boundary change as a necessary evil that’s a result of poor planning by FCPS. And even if our own neighborhoods end up among those reassigned, we want to make sure FCPS does right by McLean, so that it remains a strong school in the future - and doesn’t see its academic and extra-curricular programs gutted just to fill empty seats at a school further away, in an area where more people turn up their noses at public schools and send their kids to privates.

Wow. My kids are currently slated to attend McLean and while I agree with you that the SB completely dropped the ball on expanding McLean, you can’t just snap your fingers and make them do your bidding. Stop acting as if you’re the spokesperson for the entire McLean community; you’re not. And sending some kids to Langley will not in any way “gut” McLean. Drama queen much? The school is so over crowded that sending a few neighborhoods to Langley won’t even be a drop in the bucket at McLean.

As for your last sentence, you just sound unhinged and bitter. Sure, a lot of kids in the Langley district go to privates, but not the vast majority. Again: speak for yourself and not for the rest of the McLean families, many of whom are thrilled that they will probably get to avoid sending their kids to a school that is over crowded.

[Anonymous]

It is too early to say with any confidence how most of the new members will behave over the next four years.

Omeish has made her view pretty clear. The fact that they keep waffling to wait for the consultant to give them free reign to bus kids is obvious.

Two speakers at the last SB meeting spoke against busing. One was accused of being a racist because he said that it is not the color of the skin but the number of parents in the home that make the difference in scores. KKG attacked him. He simply pointed out that the scores of kids whose parents are military do not reflect the achievement gaps that other kids do. He's correct in that statement.

The man was a little rabid, but he was not racist. KKG attacked him after he spoke and tweeted about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When Langley had more kids and South Lakes was under-enrolled, Langley made darn sure it stayed out of that boundary study. But some Langley parents have a hard time accepting that McLean families might want to stay there or ask FCPS to add space there like it has done elsewhere. If FCPS ends up hurting McLean to justify all the seats added at Langley, it won’t bother them one bit.

Really not sure what you’re babbling about. Of course McLean should be expanded. But until they are, they have to do something about the overcrowding there. What would you suggest? More trailers? Sane people with no axe to grind agree that changing the McLean/Langley boundary is a good first step. What do you mean, “hurting McLean”? The obvious immediate solution is to move some kids to the closest school with space - which happens to be Langley. Get over yourself.

You sound like an arrogant ass with no compassion for others. This obviously isn’t going to have the same impact on Langley families as on McLean families.

It’s “arrogant” to say that while waiting for FCPS to get its act together and expand McLean, a great way to alleviate McLean’s overcrowding is to adjust the boundaries and send some neighborhoods to Langley? Ok. You’re right. You guys should just have to suffer with your hideously overcrowded school until FCPS sees fit to build an addition at McLean. Could be awhile, but sure, you just keep up the whining and victim act. Good luck to you.

Yes, it’s arrogant of you to keep suggesting that McLean families should eagerly embrace the opportunity to move to Langley, when Langley parents have always fought to keep their own kids there and resisted any boundary changes to reassign Langley students, even when Langley was overcrowded (and not under-enrolled as it is now).

Believe it or not, even with the trailers, we still love the school, prefer McLean to Langley, and view any boundary change as a necessary evil that’s a result of poor planning by FCPS. And even if our own neighborhoods end up among those reassigned, we want to make sure FCPS does right by McLean, so that it remains a strong school in the future - and doesn’t see its academic and extra-curricular programs gutted just to fill empty seats at a school further away, in an area where more people turn up their noses at public schools and send their kids to privates.

+1. No one has whined more than the Langley parents complaining last summer over whether they might get moved to Herndon - in another decade!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When Langley had more kids and South Lakes was under-enrolled, Langley made darn sure it stayed out of that boundary study. But some Langley parents have a hard time accepting that McLean families might want to stay there or ask FCPS to add space there like it has done elsewhere. If FCPS ends up hurting McLean to justify all the seats added at Langley, it won’t bother them one bit.

Really not sure what you’re babbling about. Of course McLean should be expanded. But until they are, they have to do something about the overcrowding there. What would you suggest? More trailers? Sane people with no axe to grind agree that changing the McLean/Langley boundary is a good first step. What do you mean, “hurting McLean”? The obvious immediate solution is to move some kids to the closest school with space - which happens to be Langley. Get over yourself.

You sound like an arrogant ass with no compassion for others. This obviously isn’t going to have the same impact on Langley families as on McLean families.

It’s “arrogant” to say that while waiting for FCPS to get its act together and expand McLean, a great way to alleviate McLean’s overcrowding is to adjust the boundaries and send some neighborhoods to Langley? Ok. You’re right. You guys should just have to suffer with your hideously overcrowded school until FCPS sees fit to build an addition at McLean. Could be awhile, but sure, you just keep up the whining and victim act. Good luck to you.

Yes, it’s arrogant of you to keep suggesting that McLean families should eagerly embrace the opportunity to move to Langley, when Langley parents have always fought to keep their own kids there and resisted any boundary changes to reassign Langley students, even when Langley was overcrowded (and not under-enrolled as it is now).

Believe it or not, even with the trailers, we still love the school, prefer McLean to Langley, and view any boundary change as a necessary evil that’s a result of poor planning by FCPS. And even if our own neighborhoods end up among those reassigned, we want to make sure FCPS does right by McLean, so that it remains a strong school in the future - and doesn’t see its academic and extra-curricular programs gutted just to fill empty seats at a school further away, in an area where more people turn up their noses at public schools and send their kids to privates.

Wow. My kids are currently slated to attend McLean and while I agree with you that the SB completely dropped the ball on expanding McLean, you can’t just snap your fingers and make them do your bidding. Stop acting as if you’re the spokesperson for the entire McLean community; you’re not. And sending some kids to Langley will not in any way “gut” McLean. Drama queen much? The school is so over crowded that sending a few neighborhoods to Langley won’t even be a drop in the bucket at McLean.

As for your last sentence, you just sound unhinged and bitter. Sure, a lot of kids in the Langley district go to privates, but not the vast majority. Again: speak for yourself and not for the rest of the McLean families, many of whom are thrilled that they will probably get to avoid sending their kids to a school that is over crowded.

At this point no one knows whether they will propose to move a few neighborhoods or many. Those who have seen FCPS over the years know they tend to over-react because they want to make their problems go away in one fell swoop, often to the detriment of schools and communities. Don’t kid yourself that it won’t happen again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It is too early to say with any confidence how most of the new members will behave over the next four years.

Omeish has made her view pretty clear. The fact that they keep waffling to wait for the consultant to give them free reign to bus kids is obvious.

Two speakers at the last SB meeting spoke against busing. One was accused of being a racist because he said that it is not the color of the skin but the number of parents in the home that make the difference in scores. KKG attacked him. He simply pointed out that the scores of kids whose parents are military do not reflect the achievement gaps that other kids do. He's correct in that statement.

The man was a little rabid, but he was not racist. KKG attacked him after he spoke and tweeted about it.

I’ve noticed that with the new Board they seem to go out of their way to say whether they agree or disagree with the community speakers. It used to just be citizen participation where people could say whatever they wanted unless it was totally over the top. Board members might smile or roll their eyes but there wasn’t this perceived need to call out some speakers and profusely thank others.

[Anonymous]

Lol.

IRL McLean and Langley parents have alot in common and their actions reflect that, but troll on troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol.

IRL McLean and Langley parents have alot in common and their actions reflect that, but troll on troll.

Not directed to pp

[Anonymous]

I was at the community meetings at both schools in December and detected no excitement among McLean parents about the prospect of switching to Langley. Resignation, anger, and anxiety (about grandfathering and the middle school assignment), yes, but not anyone “thrilled” about it. Maybe they are waiting to emerge later.

[Anonymous]

No one who likes their school is thrilled about redistricting, so I don't blame them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one who likes their school is thrilled about redistricting, so I don't blame them.

Why were McLean students recognized 30 times, and Langley students only four times, in the Scholastic Regional Writing Awards announced this week? Do Langley teachers just not encourage their students to participate?

I know Langley is wealthier, but it doesn't seem as if it's better in any way, besides the state of the building, that would make me welcome a redistricting.

https://www.fcps.edu/news/student-writers-honored-2020-scholastic-regional-writing-awards

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one who likes their school is thrilled about redistricting, so I don't blame them.

Why were McLean students recognized 30 times, and Langley students only four times, in the Scholastic Regional Writing Awards announced this week? Do Langley teachers just not encourage their students to participate?

I know Langley is wealthier, but it doesn't seem as if it's better in any way, besides the state of the building, that would make me welcome a redistricting.

https://www.fcps.edu/news/student-writers-honored-2020-scholastic-regional-writing-awards

The two high schools that dominated these awards were McLean and Oakton. My bet is that the award winners got used to entering competitions at Longfellow AAP and Carson AAP. Cooper has only had AAP a few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one who likes their school is thrilled about redistricting, so I don't blame them.

Why were McLean students recognized 30 times, and Langley students only four times, in the Scholastic Regional Writing Awards announced this week? Do Langley teachers just not encourage their students to participate?

I know Langley is wealthier, but it doesn't seem as if it's better in any way, besides the state of the building, that would make me welcome a redistricting.

https://www.fcps.edu/news/student-writers-honored-2020-scholastic-regional-writing-awards

Nice try. Here are the results from 2019 - TJ clearly dominated, yet it looks like they didn’t participate at all in 2020. I guess that means they’re “not a good school.”

Besides which, you are grossly off-topic. Start a new thread if you simply want to brag.