FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A plan for #1 but it will take longer to implement. There needs to be an articulated vision though, such as identifying certain ES sites that would later convert to MS, or whatever other means to create the needed MS capacity.

#2 I'd like to see IB remain as a choice program or academy, ideally at 2-3 locations like one in southern portion of county and another in western portion of county. Could be physically co-located with other specialty programs or academies such as vocational prep, music, arts, immersion, and so on alongside IB. Get enough of those programs under one roof and you've got enough students collectively to fill a HS and give students more options than they have today.

#3 only at the MS level, where you have enough of a critical mass of AAP students at any MS to serve their needs locally. This isn't true at the ES level.

#4 no, and this isn't really part of the current plan or exercise either. Some small number of students may end up moving from schools with higher average test scores to lower average test scores, but that's incidental to optimizing capacities and travel times, not some social engineering intent. If anything the opposite is true, they don't want to jeopardize any school with Title I services from being downgraded and receiving less support (and larger class sizes) than the status quo as a result of an influx of higher-income kids.

Careful, now.

You can claim the bolded, above, is “incidental,” but if “transit” “capacity” and “proximity” are not equally applied across the entire county, then it will not hold up when challenged.

That is the risk you run when you do “comprehensive” review of the entire county. You create direct comparisons of what you did, or did not do, everywhere. Making a shift solely based on a “transit time” or “proximity” benefit when such a “benefit” absent any other need was not applied elsewhere for a boundary shift will weigh against those factors being considered the true reason for the shift. Especially when the totality of the evidence demonstrates other intent by the SB and FCPS.

If a horse has four legs and a tail, and you call the tail a leg, how many legs does it have? Four, calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.

Calling a boundary change a shift made for “optimizing capacities and travel times” does not make it so in every circumstance.

The “totality of the evidence” as you describe usually is more accurately the “totality of the conjecture”. Vast majority of people are going to see/interpret the partial information available to them in whatever manner they are predisposed or supports their desired outcome, one way or the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A plan for #1 but it will take longer to implement. There needs to be an articulated vision though, such as identifying certain ES sites that would later convert to MS, or whatever other means to create the needed MS capacity.

#2 I'd like to see IB remain as a choice program or academy, ideally at 2-3 locations like one in southern portion of county and another in western portion of county. Could be physically co-located with other specialty programs or academies such as vocational prep, music, arts, immersion, and so on alongside IB. Get enough of those programs under one roof and you've got enough students collectively to fill a HS and give students more options than they have today.

#3 only at the MS level, where you have enough of a critical mass of AAP students at any MS to serve their needs locally. This isn't true at the ES level.

#4 no, and this isn't really part of the current plan or exercise either. Some small number of students may end up moving from schools with higher average test scores to lower average test scores, but that's incidental to optimizing capacities and travel times, not some social engineering intent. If anything the opposite is true, they don't want to jeopardize any school with Title I services from being downgraded and receiving less support (and larger class sizes) than the status quo as a result of an influx of higher-income kids.

Careful, now.

You can claim the bolded, above, is “incidental,” but if “transit” “capacity” and “proximity” are not equally applied across the entire county, then it will not hold up when challenged.

That is the risk you run when you do “comprehensive” review of the entire county. You create direct comparisons of what you did, or did not do, everywhere. Making a shift solely based on a “transit time” or “proximity” benefit when such a “benefit” absent any other need was not applied elsewhere for a boundary shift will weigh against those factors being considered the true reason for the shift. Especially when the totality of the evidence demonstrates other intent by the SB and FCPS.

If a horse has four legs and a tail, and you call the tail a leg, how many legs does it have? Four, calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.

Calling a boundary change a shift made for “optimizing capacities and travel times” does not make it so in every circumstance.

The “totality of the evidence” as you describe usually is more accurately the “totality of the conjecture”. Vast majority of people are going to see/interpret the partial information available to them in whatever manner they are predisposed or supports their desired outcome, one way or the other.

You and I have different views of the meaning of “evidence.” I am referring evidence that is used to support a legal challenge. Evidence created by the SB and FCPS that will be admissible in a court of law. Not conjecture. Evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A plan for #1 but it will take longer to implement. There needs to be an articulated vision though, such as identifying certain ES sites that would later convert to MS, or whatever other means to create the needed MS capacity.

#2 I'd like to see IB remain as a choice program or academy, ideally at 2-3 locations like one in southern portion of county and another in western portion of county. Could be physically co-located with other specialty programs or academies such as vocational prep, music, arts, immersion, and so on alongside IB. Get enough of those programs under one roof and you've got enough students collectively to fill a HS and give students more options than they have today.

#3 only at the MS level, where you have enough of a critical mass of AAP students at any MS to serve their needs locally. This isn't true at the ES level.

#4 no, and this isn't really part of the current plan or exercise either. Some small number of students may end up moving from schools with higher average test scores to lower average test scores, but that's incidental to optimizing capacities and travel times, not some social engineering intent. If anything the opposite is true, they don't want to jeopardize any school with Title I services from being downgraded and receiving less support (and larger class sizes) than the status quo as a result of an influx of higher-income kids.

Careful, now.

You can claim the bolded, above, is “incidental,” but if “transit” “capacity” and “proximity” are not equally applied across the entire county, then it will not hold up when challenged.

That is the risk you run when you do “comprehensive” review of the entire county. You create direct comparisons of what you did, or did not do, everywhere. Making a shift solely based on a “transit time” or “proximity” benefit when such a “benefit” absent any other need was not applied elsewhere for a boundary shift will weigh against those factors being considered the true reason for the shift. Especially when the totality of the evidence demonstrates other intent by the SB and FCPS.

If a horse has four legs and a tail, and you call the tail a leg, how many legs does it have? Four, calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg.

Calling a boundary change a shift made for “optimizing capacities and travel times” does not make it so in every circumstance.

The “totality of the evidence” as you describe usually is more accurately the “totality of the conjecture”. Vast majority of people are going to see/interpret the partial information available to them in whatever manner they are predisposed or supports their desired outcome, one way or the other.

You and I have different views of the meaning of “evidence.” I am referring evidence that is used to support a legal challenge. Evidence created by the SB and FCPS that will be admissible in a court of law. Not conjecture. Evidence.

I’m not sure how that works, “In Scenario A, FCPS took action X. In Scenario B, where considerations 1 through 5 were similar (not identical, never will be), FCPS took action Y.” So what? Aside from the fact there were at a minimum marginal differences in those considerations because no two circumstances can ever be identical, there’s also considerations 6 through 20 to take into account. Seems like tilting at windmills.

[Anonymous]

I see what did there. FAFO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really more about Coates and Parklawn, but also some reference to the comprehensive study.

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/03/18/fairfax-school-board-split-on-when-to-address-overcrowded-elementary-schools/

From that article- cram the kids and continue to stall out on boundaries, but good news!! Hayfield getting new turf field for close to a million. How’s that for a reward for last year’s mess!

Boundary issue buried in the article includes Armstrong being expanded to 800 capacity. Design capacity will expand from 784 to 800. That's only adding 16 but program capacity is 482 [membership about 360] so this huge project should allign design and program capacity for general education. 8 more gen ed classrooms adding 200 to program capacity?
https://www.ffxnow.com/2024/03/13/plan-to-renovate-armstrong-es-heads-to-planning-commission/

Dranesville ES expansion adds 12-14 gen ed classrooms - program capacity for gen ed increases by a mi nimum of 300?https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/DranesvilleESReno2023PresentationPlanningCommission1042023.pdf

So these 2 Herndon feeders intersect for current boundaries with Forestville No impact on the boundary review? The Colvin Run area parent meeting with Supt Reid at the Great Falls Libary? Great Falls addresses sent to Colvin Run? Vienna addresses - Hunter Mill district - sent to Colvin Run? Colvin Run has SPA 1806 next to 1809 Forest Edge/South Lakes. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/Coates-Area-Boundary-Maps.pdf

When Reid added the 3rd Woodson rep [Mantua-Winterset] and did not define base schools on all extra non pyramid BRAC members the process really got distorted. Even school staff live somewhere. Fairfacts Matters posted it will have 3 on BRAC- 2 not Langley and will include a West Springfield. This will be the 3rd known extra plus the 2 Langley for the pyramid. For all anyone knows Vienna/Great Falls Colvin Run parents at the Reid meeting could have been offering up Forestville or Great Falls Elementary as a middle school for her grades 6-8 project. 6-8 does not fit in Cooper. Anything is possible.

I interpret this as a way to justify taking more kids out of Forestville and that this whole boundary study is to take kids out of Langley and send them to Herndon. And, maybe, take kids from WS and send them to Lewis. But, the Langley issue is top of mind to SB. Think about it. It has co The dome up for years. Omeish was interviewed on podcast and stated that --and she's been off the board for well over a year.

Meanwhile, the rest of the county is going to pay the price to justify that move. This is going to be a mess, a big mess. The domino effect will be devastating to the whole county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really more about Coates and Parklawn, but also some reference to the comprehensive study.

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/03/18/fairfax-school-board-split-on-when-to-address-overcrowded-elementary-schools/

From that article- cram the kids and continue to stall out on boundaries, but good news!! Hayfield getting new turf field for close to a million. How’s that for a reward for last year’s mess!

Boundary issue buried in the article includes Armstrong being expanded to 800 capacity. Design capacity will expand from 784 to 800. That's only adding 16 but program capacity is 482 [membership about 360] so this huge project should allign design and program capacity for general education. 8 more gen ed classrooms adding 200 to program capacity?
https://www.ffxnow.com/2024/03/13/plan-to-renovate-armstrong-es-heads-to-planning-commission/

Dranesville ES expansion adds 12-14 gen ed classrooms - program capacity for gen ed increases by a mi nimum of 300?https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/DranesvilleESReno2023PresentationPlanningCommission1042023.pdf

So these 2 Herndon feeders intersect for current boundaries with Forestville No impact on the boundary review? The Colvin Run area parent meeting with Supt Reid at the Great Falls Libary? Great Falls addresses sent to Colvin Run? Vienna addresses - Hunter Mill district - sent to Colvin Run? Colvin Run has SPA 1806 next to 1809 Forest Edge/South Lakes. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/Coates-Area-Boundary-Maps.pdf

When Reid added the 3rd Woodson rep [Mantua-Winterset] and did not define base schools on all extra non pyramid BRAC members the process really got distorted. Even school staff live somewhere. Fairfacts Matters posted it will have 3 on BRAC- 2 not Langley and will include a West Springfield. This will be the 3rd known extra plus the 2 Langley for the pyramid. For all anyone knows Vienna/Great Falls Colvin Run parents at the Reid meeting could have been offering up Forestville or Great Falls Elementary as a middle school for her grades 6-8 project. 6-8 does not fit in Cooper. Anything is possible.

I interpret this as a way to justify taking more kids out of Forestville and that this whole boundary study is to take kids out of Langley and send them to Herndon. And, maybe, take kids from WS and send them to Lewis. But, the Langley issue is top of mind to SB. Think about it. It has co The dome up for years. Omeish was interviewed on podcast and stated that --and she's been off the board for well over a year.

Meanwhile, the rest of the county is going to pay the price to justify that move. This is going to be a mess, a big mess. The domino effect will be devastating to the whole county.

Was that omeish podcast recent? Do you remember what it was?

Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really more about Coates and Parklawn, but also some reference to the comprehensive study.

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/03/18/fairfax-school-board-split-on-when-to-address-overcrowded-elementary-schools/

From that article- cram the kids and continue to stall out on boundaries, but good news!! Hayfield getting new turf field for close to a million. How’s that for a reward for last year’s mess!

Boundary issue buried in the article includes Armstrong being expanded to 800 capacity. Design capacity will expand from 784 to 800. That's only adding 16 but program capacity is 482 [membership about 360] so this huge project should allign design and program capacity for general education. 8 more gen ed classrooms adding 200 to program capacity?
https://www.ffxnow.com/2024/03/13/plan-to-renovate-armstrong-es-heads-to-planning-commission/

Dranesville ES expansion adds 12-14 gen ed classrooms - program capacity for gen ed increases by a mi nimum of 300?https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/DranesvilleESReno2023PresentationPlanningCommission1042023.pdf

So these 2 Herndon feeders intersect for current boundaries with Forestville No impact on the boundary review? The Colvin Run area parent meeting with Supt Reid at the Great Falls Libary? Great Falls addresses sent to Colvin Run? Vienna addresses - Hunter Mill district - sent to Colvin Run? Colvin Run has SPA 1806 next to 1809 Forest Edge/South Lakes. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/Coates-Area-Boundary-Maps.pdf

When Reid added the 3rd Woodson rep [Mantua-Winterset] and did not define base schools on all extra non pyramid BRAC members the process really got distorted. Even school staff live somewhere. Fairfacts Matters posted it will have 3 on BRAC- 2 not Langley and will include a West Springfield. This will be the 3rd known extra plus the 2 Langley for the pyramid. For all anyone knows Vienna/Great Falls Colvin Run parents at the Reid meeting could have been offering up Forestville or Great Falls Elementary as a middle school for her grades 6-8 project. 6-8 does not fit in Cooper. Anything is possible.

I interpret this as a way to justify taking more kids out of Forestville and that this whole boundary study is to take kids out of Langley and send them to Herndon. And, maybe, take kids from WS and send them to Lewis. But, the Langley issue is top of mind to SB. Think about it. It has co The dome up for years. Omeish was interviewed on podcast and stated that --and she's been off the board for well over a year.

Meanwhile, the rest of the county is going to pay the price to justify that move. This is going to be a mess, a big mess. The domino effect will be devastating to the whole county.

Was that omeish podcast recent? Do you remember what it was?

Thanks.

I am not sure if it was a podcast or a broadcast. It was an interview with someone from Reston who does radio ro something. I'll see if I can figure it out. But, Omeish was definitely talking about moving Langley kids. It was when she was running for office--I think for her second term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really more about Coates and Parklawn, but also some reference to the comprehensive study.

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/03/18/fairfax-school-board-split-on-when-to-address-overcrowded-elementary-schools/

From that article- cram the kids and continue to stall out on boundaries, but good news!! Hayfield getting new turf field for close to a million. How’s that for a reward for last year’s mess!

Boundary issue buried in the article includes Armstrong being expanded to 800 capacity. Design capacity will expand from 784 to 800. That's only adding 16 but program capacity is 482 [membership about 360] so this huge project should allign design and program capacity for general education. 8 more gen ed classrooms adding 200 to program capacity?
https://www.ffxnow.com/2024/03/13/plan-to-renovate-armstrong-es-heads-to-planning-commission/

Dranesville ES expansion adds 12-14 gen ed classrooms - program capacity for gen ed increases by a mi nimum of 300?https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/DranesvilleESReno2023PresentationPlanningCommission1042023.pdf

So these 2 Herndon feeders intersect for current boundaries with Forestville No impact on the boundary review? The Colvin Run area parent meeting with Supt Reid at the Great Falls Libary? Great Falls addresses sent to Colvin Run? Vienna addresses - Hunter Mill district - sent to Colvin Run? Colvin Run has SPA 1806 next to 1809 Forest Edge/South Lakes. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/Coates-Area-Boundary-Maps.pdf

When Reid added the 3rd Woodson rep [Mantua-Winterset] and did not define base schools on all extra non pyramid BRAC members the process really got distorted. Even school staff live somewhere. Fairfacts Matters posted it will have 3 on BRAC- 2 not Langley and will include a West Springfield. This will be the 3rd known extra plus the 2 Langley for the pyramid. For all anyone knows Vienna/Great Falls Colvin Run parents at the Reid meeting could have been offering up Forestville or Great Falls Elementary as a middle school for her grades 6-8 project. 6-8 does not fit in Cooper. Anything is possible.

I interpret this as a way to justify taking more kids out of Forestville and that this whole boundary study is to take kids out of Langley and send them to Herndon. And, maybe, take kids from WS and send them to Lewis. But, the Langley issue is top of mind to SB. Think about it. It has co The dome up for years. Omeish was interviewed on podcast and stated that --and she's been off the board for well over a year.

Meanwhile, the rest of the county is going to pay the price to justify that move. This is going to be a mess, a big mess. The domino effect will be devastating to the whole county.

Was that omeish podcast recent? Do you remember what it was?

Thanks.

I am not sure if it was a podcast or a broadcast. It was an interview with someone from Reston who does radio ro something. I'll see if I can figure it out. But, Omeish was definitely talking about moving Langley kids. It was when she was running for office--I think for her second term.

Got it. Thanks again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really more about Coates and Parklawn, but also some reference to the comprehensive study.

https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/03/18/fairfax-school-board-split-on-when-to-address-overcrowded-elementary-schools/

From that article- cram the kids and continue to stall out on boundaries, but good news!! Hayfield getting new turf field for close to a million. How’s that for a reward for last year’s mess!

Boundary issue buried in the article includes Armstrong being expanded to 800 capacity. Design capacity will expand from 784 to 800. That's only adding 16 but program capacity is 482 [membership about 360] so this huge project should allign design and program capacity for general education. 8 more gen ed classrooms adding 200 to program capacity?
https://www.ffxnow.com/2024/03/13/plan-to-renovate-armstrong-es-heads-to-planning-commission/

Dranesville ES expansion adds 12-14 gen ed classrooms - program capacity for gen ed increases by a mi nimum of 300?https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/DranesvilleESReno2023PresentationPlanningCommission1042023.pdf

So these 2 Herndon feeders intersect for current boundaries with Forestville No impact on the boundary review? The Colvin Run area parent meeting with Supt Reid at the Great Falls Libary? Great Falls addresses sent to Colvin Run? Vienna addresses - Hunter Mill district - sent to Colvin Run? Colvin Run has SPA 1806 next to 1809 Forest Edge/South Lakes. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/Coates-Area-Boundary-Maps.pdf

When Reid added the 3rd Woodson rep [Mantua-Winterset] and did not define base schools on all extra non pyramid BRAC members the process really got distorted. Even school staff live somewhere. Fairfacts Matters posted it will have 3 on BRAC- 2 not Langley and will include a West Springfield. This will be the 3rd known extra plus the 2 Langley for the pyramid. For all anyone knows Vienna/Great Falls Colvin Run parents at the Reid meeting could have been offering up Forestville or Great Falls Elementary as a middle school for her grades 6-8 project. 6-8 does not fit in Cooper. Anything is possible.

I interpret this as a way to justify taking more kids out of Forestville and that this whole boundary study is to take kids out of Langley and send them to Herndon. And, maybe, take kids from WS and send them to Lewis. But, the Langley issue is top of mind to SB. Think about it. It has co The dome up for years. Omeish was interviewed on podcast and stated that --and she's been off the board for well over a year.

Meanwhile, the rest of the county is going to pay the price to justify that move. This is going to be a mess, a big mess. The domino effect will be devastating to the whole county.

Was that omeish podcast recent? Do you remember what it was?

Thanks.

I am not sure if it was a podcast or a broadcast. It was an interview with someone from Reston who does radio ro something. I'll see if I can figure it out. But, Omeish was definitely talking about moving Langley kids. It was when she was running for office--I think for her second term.

Video no longer available:
https://www.abraromeish.com/news-blog/2019/3/13/reston-impact-interview-with-abrar-omeish

I've tried to find it elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Found it!

I'd forgotten how egregious this is. Talk about bigotry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFJi-tHjWXg

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Found it!

I'd forgotten how egregious this is. Talk about bigotry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFJi-tHjWXg

If I recall this correctly, there was some guy from Reston interviewing Omeish when she was a candidate in 2019 and complaining about the Langley boundaries. She went along with it, but it wasn't like she brought it up or added much.

You say "Talk about bigotry." If I recall, the Reston guy claimed that Langley was skimming the "creme of the crop" from Herndon and Reston neighborhoods. So you can claim that's bigoted if he was equating wealthier families, mostly White and Asian, with the "creme of the crop." On the other hand, FCPS has curated Langley's boundaries over the years so that, in 2025, it still has no condos and apartments and only a small number of townhouses. That didn't happen by accident, so there may have been some bigotry at play there as well.

It will be interesting to see if, once again, other parts of the county are subjected to boundary changes while no one gets moved out of Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Found it!

I'd forgotten how egregious this is. Talk about bigotry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFJi-tHjWXg

If I recall this correctly, there was some guy from Reston interviewing Omeish when she was a candidate in 2019 and complaining about the Langley boundaries. She went along with it, but it wasn't like she brought it up or added much.

You say "Talk about bigotry." If I recall, the Reston guy claimed that Langley was skimming the "creme of the crop" from Herndon and Reston neighborhoods. So you can claim that's bigoted if he was equating wealthier families, mostly White and Asian, with the "creme of the crop." On the other hand, FCPS has curated Langley's boundaries over the years so that, in 2025, it still has no condos and apartments and only a small number of townhouses. That didn't happen by accident, so there may have been some bigotry at play there as well.

It will be interesting to see if, once again, other parts of the county are subjected to boundary changes while no one gets moved out of Langley.

big·ot
[ˈbiɡət]
noun
a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group:
"don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city" · "a racist bigot"

The vitriol in his speech was troubling. The definition of bigot seems applicable. These are kids he is talking about. And, I looked it up--Langley is around 50% white. Using the term "lily white" seems like a slur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Found it!

I'd forgotten how egregious this is. Talk about bigotry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFJi-tHjWXg

If I recall this correctly, there was some guy from Reston interviewing Omeish when she was a candidate in 2019 and complaining about the Langley boundaries. She went along with it, but it wasn't like she brought it up or added much.

You say "Talk about bigotry." If I recall, the Reston guy claimed that Langley was skimming the "creme of the crop" from Herndon and Reston neighborhoods. So you can claim that's bigoted if he was equating wealthier families, mostly White and Asian, with the "creme of the crop." On the other hand, FCPS has curated Langley's boundaries over the years so that, in 2025, it still has no condos and apartments and only a small number of townhouses. That didn't happen by accident, so there may have been some bigotry at play there as well.

It will be interesting to see if, once again, other parts of the county are subjected to boundary changes while no one gets moved out of Langley.

big·ot
[ˈbiɡət]
noun
a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group:
"don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city" · "a racist bigot"

The vitriol in his speech was troubling. The definition of bigot seems applicable. These are kids he is talking about. And, I looked it up--Langley is around 50% white. Using the term "lily white" seems like a slur.

It was probably over 60% White at the time of the Omeish interview, but of course not "lily white" even then.

But, again, people can argue over who was more bigoted or race/status conscious - the guy from Reston complaining about Langley's demographics, the people from Langley who sought out those demographics, or the folks from FCPS like Elaine Tholen who kept Langley without the housing diversity that might have brought the percentage of FARMS kids at Langley somewhat more in line with other schools.

If I were you, I'd stop poking this particular bear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Found it!

I'd forgotten how egregious this is. Talk about bigotry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFJi-tHjWXg

If I recall this correctly, there was some guy from Reston interviewing Omeish when she was a candidate in 2019 and complaining about the Langley boundaries. She went along with it, but it wasn't like she brought it up or added much.

You say "Talk about bigotry." If I recall, the Reston guy claimed that Langley was skimming the "creme of the crop" from Herndon and Reston neighborhoods. So you can claim that's bigoted if he was equating wealthier families, mostly White and Asian, with the "creme of the crop." On the other hand, FCPS has curated Langley's boundaries over the years so that, in 2025, it still has no condos and apartments and only a small number of townhouses. That didn't happen by accident, so there may have been some bigotry at play there as well.

It will be interesting to see if, once again, other parts of the county are subjected to boundary changes while no one gets moved out of Langley.

big·ot
[ˈbiɡət]
noun
a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group:
"don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city" · "a racist bigot"

The vitriol in his speech was troubling. The definition of bigot seems applicable. These are kids he is talking about. And, I looked it up--Langley is around 50% white. Using the term "lily white" seems like a slur.

It was probably over 60% White at the time of the Omeish interview, but of course not "lily white" even then.

But, again, people can argue over who was more bigoted or race/status conscious - the guy from Reston complaining about Langley's demographics, the people from Langley who sought out those demographics, or the folks from FCPS like Elaine Tholen who kept Langley without the housing diversity that might have brought the percentage of FARMS kids at Langley somewhat more in line with other schools.

If I were you, I'd stop poking this particular bear.

Look. When Langley boundaries were developed, we did not have the current demographics in Fairfax County. Even at Herndon, we did not have the current demographics.

But, now, the School Board wants to change the boundaries based on demographics. They have been pretty clear in the past about that goal.
So, if that is what they are doing, then "own" it. But, the Langley parents did not cause this. I knew a family long ago that did not want to leave McLean for Langley. Things change. But, changing boundaries based on that is the purpose of this study. That is pretty obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Found it!

I'd forgotten how egregious this is. Talk about bigotry.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFJi-tHjWXg

If I recall this correctly, there was some guy from Reston interviewing Omeish when she was a candidate in 2019 and complaining about the Langley boundaries. She went along with it, but it wasn't like she brought it up or added much.

You say "Talk about bigotry." If I recall, the Reston guy claimed that Langley was skimming the "creme of the crop" from Herndon and Reston neighborhoods. So you can claim that's bigoted if he was equating wealthier families, mostly White and Asian, with the "creme of the crop." On the other hand, FCPS has curated Langley's boundaries over the years so that, in 2025, it still has no condos and apartments and only a small number of townhouses. That didn't happen by accident, so there may have been some bigotry at play there as well.

It will be interesting to see if, once again, other parts of the county are subjected to boundary changes while no one gets moved out of Langley.

big·ot
[ˈbiɡət]
noun
a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group:
"don't let a few small-minded bigots destroy the good image of the city" · "a racist bigot"

The vitriol in his speech was troubling. The definition of bigot seems applicable. These are kids he is talking about. And, I looked it up--Langley is around 50% white. Using the term "lily white" seems like a slur.

It was probably over 60% White at the time of the Omeish interview, but of course not "lily white" even then.

But, again, people can argue over who was more bigoted or race/status conscious - the guy from Reston complaining about Langley's demographics, the people from Langley who sought out those demographics, or the folks from FCPS like Elaine Tholen who kept Langley without the housing diversity that might have brought the percentage of FARMS kids at Langley somewhat more in line with other schools.

If I were you, I'd stop poking this particular bear.

But where could they even get “housing diversity” from in that area of the county? Even the townhomes and condos in Tyson’s are $$$, the condos probably don’t have HS age kids living there anyway, and isn’t the Tysons area affordable housing much physically closer to McLean than to Langley?