FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

I'm a registered democrat and I would choose middle school afterschool programs and camp over a DEI office every day and twice on sundays. We aren't a well-funded, well-off county any more. We can't have all these fluffy nice-to-have extras.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The answer is that FCPS does NOT want to find the kids who shouldn't be in FCPS schools. They aren't looking because they don't want to find.

+1 this is sadly true. The attitude from FCPS admin is basically, the more the merrier. I taught at a school convenient to PG county. We had many students who lived in Maryland but used relatives or friend's addresses to attend. Principal did NOT want to know about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

I'm a registered democrat and I would choose middle school afterschool programs and camp over a DEI office every day and twice on sundays. We aren't a well-funded, well-off county any more. We can't have all these fluffy nice-to-have extras.

What do you think the DEI office does?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

How about you come back with the "book report." I'm a DP, but I could look at the organization chart. All those people to "investigate?" What did they find from their home computers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

I'm a registered democrat and I would choose middle school afterschool programs and camp over a DEI office every day and twice on sundays. We aren't a well-funded, well-off county any more. We can't have all these fluffy nice-to-have extras.

What do you think the DEI office does?

If people can’t agree on a definition after billions in spending and four years of indoctrination, the program failed. Time to move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If School Board members like Stu Gibson, Kathy Smith and Elaine Tholen hadn’t been so obviously biased and self-serving in orchestrating prior one-off boundary changes, they wouldn’t have felt the need to move to a different process. You can thank them if you don’t like how it turns out this time.


So your assertion is -checks notes- that these school board reps should not listen to their constituents?

You think that Stu and Kathy listened to their constiuents? And, I think you are referring to the 2008 redistricting which was Janie Strauss--not Elaine Tholen.

The only constituents that Stu listened to was the PTA at South Lakes High School which orchestrated the whole thing. They even had maps posted on their PTA site until someone found it and posted the link on Fairfax Underground. They refused to accept McNair and really wanted Armstrong and Aldrin, but Herndon PTA stepped in on that.

Believe me, NONE of Kathy Smith's constituents wanted the boundary shift. She did it as a favor to her friend, Stu. And, if Stu had listened to most of his constituents it would never have happened. Fox Mill and the Floris neighborhoods absolutely did not want it. When it came to be a "done deal" the redistricted from Floris and Fox Mill begged for AP. They were ignored. Go find the video from 2008 of the speakers. It was awful how they were treated.

There were other self-serving boundary changes besides the 2008 South Lakes change, and two later ones involved Smith and then Tholen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

I'm a registered democrat and I would choose middle school afterschool programs and camp over a DEI office every day and twice on sundays. We aren't a well-funded, well-off county any more. We can't have all these fluffy nice-to-have extras.

+1000 !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

I'm a registered democrat and I would choose middle school afterschool programs and camp over a DEI office every day and twice on sundays. We aren't a well-funded, well-off county any more. We can't have all these fluffy nice-to-have extras.

Can people defending the DEI bureaucracy within Gatehouse point to tangible achievements for which those employees can rightly take primary credit?

Otherwise, the DEI bureaucracies are kind of cheap (until they aren't) way to demonstrate a commitment to "equity" without actually doing the hard work in the classrooms to help kids meet their potential. And then, once you have that bureaucracy installed, you end up with a lot of people who want to expand their offices and defend their paid positions.

I know this sounds a bit Musk-like, but FCPS claims to care about spending money wisely as a reason for the boundary review (notwithstanding other evidence that they don't give a shit, like wasting $86M on Dunn Loring, but I digress) so it would be helpful to understand what these Gatehouse employees are actually doing that benefits kids. They can spend all day tracking differences in performance among various student cohorts at different schools, but that's make-work - what are they doing to IMPROVE performance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the solution that those who are opposed to this redistricting plan (which allegedly hasn't been formulated yet) seeking?

Is it to:
A.) Not do any redistricting, and allow our overcrowded schools to stay overcrowded, while underutilizing schools elsewhere?
B.) Only do redistricting within existing pyramids (which can only partially address the problem)?
C.) Accept that redistricting needs to be done, but rally the people in your neighborhood to scream the loudest so that it isn't done to your kids?
D.) Is there another proposed outcome I'm missing?

#1. Eliminate IB, switching all schools to AP, with a phase out for juniors and seniors who are actually pursuing the IB diploma, which is a TINY number of students. This closes the IB transfer loophole.

#2 In 4 years, look at enrollment numbers and test scores post IB. Schools that lose a lot if studdnts through the IB loophole should show enrollment growth by hundreds of high performing students in some cases, like Lewis HS, as kids who are zoned to Lewis return to their neighborhood high school

AND

#3 Put an AAP program in every middle school, closing the middle school AAP transfers. This will also bring dozens or hundreds of high performing studdnts back to the failing high school pyramids. Thrse students attending AAP out of pyramid for middle school often use whatever loophole they can find to stay with their friends for high school in the AAP pyramid.

Doing #2 and #3 will fix many of the issues in 2-4 years. It will balance enrollment in high schools and middle schools without rezoning, save money on busses, improve test scores of lower ranked high schools without rezoning a single student, and will save money by eliminating unwanted, expensive IB.

And THIS! provides the equity in programs we are looking for and natural leveling out. Can you be on the SB?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've no idea how many Langley people are on here--probably a lot read it. However, there are plenty of others who are very concerned about this. It is not about being sent to a lower performing school, it is about staying where you are.
I just remember when some Chantilly families were sent to the "better" Oakton. They were very upset. Why? Kids had grown up playing CYA sports. They had siblings at Chantilly and lived VERY close to Chantilly. One parent later attacked Kathy Smith when she was running for Supervisor because she was on the School Board. Neighborhoods were pitted against neighborhoods.
Boundaries should not be changed unless it is absolutely necessary.

Amen. This school board thinks kids are just interchangeable cogs in the FCPS machine.

I’m always floored that the SB has such disdain for its students.

Well technically they are interchangeable for purposes of redistricting. Your house location serves as a proxy for SES and fits the profile of the type of kids they want to move. Anyone who can afford your house will do. There is nothing unique about your child that another child whose parents are in the same economic range couldn't achieve.

I think that this comment right here represents the school board’s thinking.

Everyone should understand that this is how the school board thinks. “F your kids, they aren’t special, and your kids’ community doesn’t matter.”

This is how Sniveling Sandy Anderson views your kids. This is how Marcia St. John- Cunning views your kids, this is how Robyn Lady views your kids. The school board members do not care about your kids as part of this process. They want to equalize the FARMs rate set each school, your kid’s welfare be damned.

They take Fairfax families for granted. Shame on them.

How thick are you? Equalized FARMs rates across the county would kill Title I. They want Title I for all the kids who benefit most from it. If anything that's an argument for concentrating FARMS, not equalizing it.

Title 1 is Federal funding isn’t it? I doubt we can count on that in the current administration. Yes, pretty much no matter how they draw the boundaries, some schools are going to be a lot more difficult in terms of the FARMS/ESOL rate than others simply due to the populations. But the current problem seems to be more the new state regulations and requirements on school quality and accreditation, not anything federal.

NP.

FCPS claims they are facing a “fiscal shortfall,” but FCPS alone decides WHAT they will purchase/fund with their budget;

FCPS has - so far - chosen to keep paying the high salary of Chief Equity Officer, Nardos King, along with her staff of over 60 full time DEI officers;

The only threat to FCPS continuing to receive federal funding is FCPS insistence on maintaining their costly DEI office.


Are the FCPS Board, Michele Reid, and Gatehouse seriously going to cost our kids the Federal funding they need, AND continue paying the 60+ member DEI department?

Any idea what percentage of the $4b budget this department makes up?

$6.4 million…it is criminal for them to maintain this in the face of federal funding removal threat

https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/pricetag-of-equity-in-fairfax-county-schools-6-4-million/article_6e14ee46-db8a-11ef-ba7b-4b737bdff938.html?

Jeez! Get rid of the useless DEI office and use the savings for the middle school afterschool program and middle school camp that the county wants to cut, and still have 2 million left over. No brainer.

You don't even know what this office does. Do a little research and come back with a book report, PP. Stop making false claims based on your political party's talking points.

I'm a registered democrat and I would choose middle school afterschool programs and camp over a DEI office every day and twice on sundays. We aren't a well-funded, well-off county any more. We can't have all these fluffy nice-to-have extras.

What do you think the DEI office does?

If people can’t agree on a definition after billions in spending and four years of indoctrination, the program failed. Time to move on.

Nah, people just willfully ignorant to try and make that claim to try and shut down something that helps "others".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the solution that those who are opposed to this redistricting plan (which allegedly hasn't been formulated yet) seeking?

Is it to:
A.) Not do any redistricting, and allow our overcrowded schools to stay overcrowded, while underutilizing schools elsewhere?
B.) Only do redistricting within existing pyramids (which can only partially address the problem)?
C.) Accept that redistricting needs to be done, but rally the people in your neighborhood to scream the loudest so that it isn't done to your kids?
D.) Is there another proposed outcome I'm missing?

Yep. Redistrict as needed to address capacity issues like they have been doing (albeit poorly) for the last forty years. Their first consultant's finding, which they have ignored, is that stability is one of the most important issues for kids, and is the issue parents care about most. There is absolutely no need or appetite for a start from scratch boundary review, especially one tainted by the overwhleming evidence that the school board's primary driver is socioeconomic rebalancing/One Fairfax and not capacity and utilizaton optimization.

Where can I find the results of this first study? When was it done? I'd like to see the information.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C9L3KJ073EA6/$file/MGT%20Boundary%20Policy%20Presentation.pdf

Of particular note:

Page 27: #1 reason respondents picked their current residence was to have kids attend a particular base schoool

Page 33: Highest priority to address overcrowding should be the construction of addition or additional facilities on school grounds

Page 34: Highest priority to address under-enrolled schools should be program modifications rather than boundary changes

Page 36: When boundary changes are being made, "balance" to reflect county-wide demographics and elminating attendance islands are low priorities

Page 37: Highest priority for implementation of boundary changes is grandfathering of students within existing pyramid

[Anonymous]

^ The survey was done in September 2021 and presented in December 2021.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the solution that those who are opposed to this redistricting plan (which allegedly hasn't been formulated yet) seeking?

Is it to:
A.) Not do any redistricting, and allow our overcrowded schools to stay overcrowded, while underutilizing schools elsewhere?
B.) Only do redistricting within existing pyramids (which can only partially address the problem)?
C.) Accept that redistricting needs to be done, but rally the people in your neighborhood to scream the loudest so that it isn't done to your kids?
D.) Is there another proposed outcome I'm missing?

#1. Eliminate IB, switching all schools to AP, with a phase out for juniors and seniors who are actually pursuing the IB diploma, which is a TINY number of students. This closes the IB transfer loophole.

#2 In 4 years, look at enrollment numbers and test scores post IB. Schools that lose a lot if studdnts through the IB loophole should show enrollment growth by hundreds of high performing students in some cases, like Lewis HS, as kids who are zoned to Lewis return to their neighborhood high school

AND

#3 Put an AAP program in every middle school, closing the middle school AAP transfers. This will also bring dozens or hundreds of high performing studdnts back to the failing high school pyramids. Thrse students attending AAP out of pyramid for middle school often use whatever loophole they can find to stay with their friends for high school in the AAP pyramid.

Doing #2 and #3 will fix many of the issues in 2-4 years. It will balance enrollment in high schools and middle schools without rezoning, save money on busses, improve test scores of lower ranked high schools without rezoning a single student, and will save money by eliminating unwanted, expensive IB.

AND

The big one is do a county wide residency check of all grades in high school, followed by a yearly residency check when kids promote to the next building (Kindergarten/elementary enrollment, 7th grade, 9th grade)

We have multiple families who live out of our zone, who somehow send their kids to our high school that have been closed to transfers for at least a decade. I know several who moved in elementary or middle school who stayed at our school through graduation, in spite living in other pyramids.

Curious how your residency check idea would be implemented? Show a utility bill in your name or similar? Tons of busy work for admins incurring additional costs with marginal if any benefit change from the status quo. Literally follow kids home from school to ensure they live actually live where they say they do? I think that's a tad more of a 1984 dystopian that most county residents are interested in pursuing. I'm not saying there isn't a problem here or that we shouldn't try to prevent people from violating the rules/law, but just unclear what an actual realistic solution would look like that would meaningfully address the issue without being overbearing.

DP.

FCPS - which is admittedly an enormous school system - employs exactly ONE person tasked with residency enforcement. One (1) person.

As for the approved methods that FCPS employee uses, why don’t you do your homework, PP, instead of building straw-man arguments like you did in your post?

So you are happy with the current methods, you just think they are understaffed. How much do you want to spend on staffing up residency enforcement, and what are the estimates for how much will be saved?

How many students attend FCPS schools while living in neighboring jurisdictions?

Oh wait: FCPS has no idea because they do not want to find out. My guess is as good as anyone’s guess and I guess 25%; prove me wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what is the solution that those who are opposed to this redistricting plan (which allegedly hasn't been formulated yet) seeking?

Is it to:
A.) Not do any redistricting, and allow our overcrowded schools to stay overcrowded, while underutilizing schools elsewhere?
B.) Only do redistricting within existing pyramids (which can only partially address the problem)?
C.) Accept that redistricting needs to be done, but rally the people in your neighborhood to scream the loudest so that it isn't done to your kids?
D.) Is there another proposed outcome I'm missing?

Yep. Redistrict as needed to address capacity issues like they have been doing (albeit poorly) for the last forty years. Their first consultant's finding, which they have ignored, is that stability is one of the most important issues for kids, and is the issue parents care about most. There is absolutely no need or appetite for a start from scratch boundary review, especially one tainted by the overwhleming evidence that the school board's primary driver is socioeconomic rebalancing/One Fairfax and not capacity and utilizaton optimization.

Where can I find the results of this first study? When was it done? I'd like to see the information.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/C9L3KJ073EA6/$file/MGT%20Boundary%20Policy%20Presentation.pdf

Of particular note:

Page 27: #1 reason respondents picked their current residence was to have kids attend a particular base schoool

Page 33: Highest priority to address overcrowding should be the construction of addition or additional facilities on school grounds

Page 34: Highest priority to address under-enrolled schools should be program modifications rather than boundary changes

Page 36: When boundary changes are being made, "balance" to reflect county-wide demographics and elminating attendance islands are low priorities

Page 37: Highest priority for implementation of boundary changes is grandfathering of students within existing pyramid

FCPS was desperately hoping the #1 conclusion would be “to further racial equity.” When that did not happen, they buried the results of the study they paid for (with our tax dollars).