FCPS is turning the new high school purchased to fix crowding into an Aviation magnet school instead of a high school??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oakton parents freaking out about being rezoned to the new high school. Do they know something we don’t? I haven’t seen any sort of maps yet.

There is a group that has been trying to organize a petition for a few weeks now. Are they at the meeting?

I don’t know, is the meeting going on right now or is it starting later tonight? I have seen some wording that makes it sound like they already think or know they are being zoned to the new school, but I don’t know what that is based on other than speculation. It seems less likely to me that parts of Oakton get rezoned there and more likely for parts of Chantilly and Westfield and some Southlakes to go there. If anything, maybe they should be worried that they will be sent to South Lakes to backfill there.

[Anonymous]

South Lakes won't need backfill.

[Anonymous]

Melanie Meren is on Facebook saying that anyone who is in high school now will have the option to remain at their current school even if their home gets re-zoned, and that the new high school is included in this policy. But doesn’t the policy specifically say that the grandfathering does not apply when a new school is opening?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Melanie Meren is on Facebook saying that anyone who is in high school now will have the option to remain at their current school even if their home gets re-zoned, and that the new high school is included in this policy. But doesn’t the policy specifically say that the grandfathering does not apply when a new school is opening?[/quote

Correct regarding the new school, they’d have to change the policy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Melanie Meren is on Facebook saying that anyone who is in high school now will have the option to remain at their current school even if their home gets re-zoned, and that the new high school is included in this policy. But doesn’t the policy specifically say that the grandfathering does not apply when a new school is opening?[/quote

Correct regarding the new school, they’d have to change the policy

Wow, so a school board member is publicly saying the wrong thing. That’s going to really upset some families of current ninth graders who get zoned to the new high school for 10th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Melanie Meren is on Facebook saying that anyone who is in high school now will have the option to remain at their current school even if their home gets re-zoned, and that the new high school is included in this policy. But doesn’t the policy specifically say that the grandfathering does not apply when a new school is opening?

According to Policy 8130, as amended: "These allowances [i.e., grandfathering] shall not be applicable in the opening of a new school, or in the closing of an existing school."

The thinking has been that, if you open a new school, you need to start populating it, so if you open as a 9-11 school juniors typically have an option to stay at their existing school, but not rising freshmen or sophomores.

If you don't require rising sophomores to attend the new school, you end up with people trying to find out what everyone else is doing and adjusting their plans accordingly. So they could end up opening a high school with 500 freshmen and a much smaller number of sophomores. That has a big impact on staffing and what courses can be offered.

[Anonymous]

Just one more example of how poorly FCPS has handled this process. By the time they're done many who were salivating to attend the shiny new school with a pool will be looking for ways to avoid it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Melanie Meren is on Facebook saying that anyone who is in high school now will have the option to remain at their current school even if their home gets re-zoned, and that the new high school is included in this policy. But doesn’t the policy specifically say that the grandfathering does not apply when a new school is opening?

Will the county be providing busing to both schools? In any given neighborhood, one bus for students wishing to goto Chantilly and another bus for students electing to go to KAA?

[Anonymous]

Herrity's critique has detailed arguments to support position. Whether Herrity is a moderate or not ... Or whether he is a Youngkin lackey or not, does not negate his arguments. I am more interested in reading comments that rebut his arguments and less about suspected associations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Herrity's critique has detailed arguments to support position. Whether Herrity is a moderate or not ... Or whether he is a Youngkin lackey or not, does not negate his arguments. I am more interested in reading comments that rebut his arguments and less about suspected associations.

Moving kids out of their neighborhoods and communities is not good. Putting them on long bus rides is not good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Herrity's critique has detailed arguments to support position. Whether Herrity is a moderate or not ... Or whether he is a Youngkin lackey or not, does not negate his arguments. I am more interested in reading comments that rebut his arguments and less about suspected associations.

Moving kids out of their neighborhoods and communities is not good. Putting them on long bus rides is not good.

cont. And, the details about the costs were also not accurate. They were straight out of that woman who posts on Nextdoor. Greatly exaggerated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Herrity's critique has detailed arguments to support position. Whether Herrity is a moderate or not ... Or whether he is a Youngkin lackey or not, does not negate his arguments. I am more interested in reading comments that rebut his arguments and less about suspected associations.

Moving kids out of their neighborhoods and communities is not good. Putting them on long bus rides is not good.

Kids rarely go to high school in their immediate neighborhood, and people often define their “communities” as the areas currently assigned to a particular school. And some of those with the longest commutes are the most eager to stay at their current schools.

So you haven’t offered a compelling rebuttal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Herrity's critique has detailed arguments to support position. Whether Herrity is a moderate or not ... Or whether he is a Youngkin lackey or not, does not negate his arguments. I am more interested in reading comments that rebut his arguments and less about suspected associations.

Moving kids out of their neighborhoods and communities is not good. Putting them on long bus rides is not good.

cont. And, the details about the costs were also not accurate. They were straight out of that woman who posts on Nextdoor. Greatly exaggerated.

I've noticed the Nextdoor / Facebook crowd's approach is to just keep repeating things that aren't true to support their argument hoping that if they say it enough people will accept it without researching further.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Herrity's critique has detailed arguments to support position. Whether Herrity is a moderate or not ... Or whether he is a Youngkin lackey or not, does not negate his arguments. I am more interested in reading comments that rebut his arguments and less about suspected associations.

Moving kids out of their neighborhoods and communities is not good. Putting them on long bus rides is not good.

Kids rarely go to high school in their immediate neighborhood, and people often define their “communities” as the areas currently assigned to a particular school. And some of those with the longest commutes are the most eager to stay at their current schools.

So you haven’t offered a compelling rebuttal.

Because you want your kids to go to a faraway school does not mean everyone does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Herrity's critique has detailed arguments to support position. Whether Herrity is a moderate or not ... Or whether he is a Youngkin lackey or not, does not negate his arguments. I am more interested in reading comments that rebut his arguments and less about suspected associations.

Moving kids out of their neighborhoods and communities is not good. Putting them on long bus rides is not good.

Kids rarely go to high school in their immediate neighborhood, and people often define their “communities” as the areas currently assigned to a particular school. And some of those with the longest commutes are the most eager to stay at their current schools.

So you haven’t offered a compelling rebuttal.

Just because you disagree doesn't make you right either. Seems like you are the one that is going to have to work a lot harder to find an argument that actually works because this is happening.