FCPS HS Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:County FARMs rates have doubled to 40%. This change has taken place over the last 15 years. To put this in perspective, Alexandria is 53% FARMs students.

There’s nowhere else for the increasing poor population to live in NOVA. Arlington is too expensive and Alexandria is out of room. Plenty of room here in Fairfax.

You can’t hide from this anymore. Especially in our progressive enclave.

Stop giving zoning variances and stop subsidizing low income housing. Massive low income developments are only economical when they are subsidized.

This is partially political, but I think we are heading the opposite direction of this recommendation. In fact, Fairfax is piloting a UBI effort in the coming months, IIRC.

And the optics of Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon are pretty stark. I don’t think the progressive side of our governing officials in Fairfax county want to perpetuate the idea of the “wrong side of the tracks.”

Plus with renovation plans/queues being so slow and out of date, boundary changes are actually an efficient method of using our existing infrastructure.

You’re going to entrust boundary changes to the same body that approved expanding Herndon to over 2700 seats a year before they projected the enrollment would be about 1900 in five years?

No thanks. Let’s get a new renovation queue developed by some people who actually know what they are doing first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:County FARMs rates have doubled to 40%. This change has taken place over the last 15 years. To put this in perspective, Alexandria is 53% FARMs students.

There’s nowhere else for the increasing poor population to live in NOVA. Arlington is too expensive and Alexandria is out of room. Plenty of room here in Fairfax.

You can’t hide from this anymore. Especially in our progressive enclave.

Stop giving zoning variances and stop subsidizing low income housing. Massive low income developments are only economical when they are subsidized.

This is partially political, but I think we are heading the opposite direction of this recommendation. In fact, Fairfax is piloting a UBI effort in the coming months, IIRC.

And the optics of Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon are pretty stark. I don’t think the progressive side of our governing officials in Fairfax county want to perpetuate the idea of the “wrong side of the tracks.”

Plus with renovation plans/queues being so slow and out of date, boundary changes are actually an efficient method of using our existing infrastructure.

Get back to me when they build anything like https://www.pennrose.com/apartments/virginia/residences-at-north-hill/ is built in Vienna or Greatfalls

Dominion Square West in Vienna (Exchange at Spring Hill Station) will be all affordable housing. Currently zoned to Marshall but they could always reassign it to Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:County FARMs rates have doubled to 40%. This change has taken place over the last 15 years. To put this in perspective, Alexandria is 53% FARMs students.

There’s nowhere else for the increasing poor population to live in NOVA. Arlington is too expensive and Alexandria is out of room. Plenty of room here in Fairfax.

You can’t hide from this anymore. Especially in our progressive enclave.

So to sum up, let’s just drag the whole system down to the lowest level? You know that the ability to sustain services for the FARMS kids is dependent on tax revenue directly linked to property value, including in outsized percent the property value in these low farms areas.

Redistricting doesn’t solve anything for those kids.

I don’t know what to tell you. These are the facts and there is no way to avoid it. Many metros are experiencing similar issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:County FARMs rates have doubled to 40%. This change has taken place over the last 15 years. To put this in perspective, Alexandria is 53% FARMs students.

There’s nowhere else for the increasing poor population to live in NOVA. Arlington is too expensive and Alexandria is out of room. Plenty of room here in Fairfax.

You can’t hide from this anymore. Especially in our progressive enclave.

So to sum up, let’s just drag the whole system down to the lowest level? You know that the ability to sustain services for the FARMS kids is dependent on tax revenue directly linked to property value, including in outsized percent the property value in these low farms areas.

Redistricting doesn’t solve anything for those kids.

I don’t know what to tell you. These are the facts and there is no way to avoid it. Many metros are experiencing similar issues.

The solution is not courting more families whose kids will need FARMS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A focus right now should be the policy they are working on - 8130.

Everyone should let them know, whether you think you’re up for a boundary change or not, that it is unacceptable to only grandfather in high school seniors to a boundary change. At a minimum, juniors and seniors should have the option to finish high school where they started. I’d personally prefer changes to start with a freshman class.

And they are working on language for “expedited boundary changes” needing only public notice vs. public hearings if less than 15% of the school is moved.

If you communicate with a SB member right now, they are passing the buck, saying their only focus is policy 8130 and the Superintendent will use it to implement changes.

Let’s make sure those two reasonable items are included in that policy.

Yep, let the board know if you want your freshman or sophomore to stay with their friends in high school, rather than be sent to a brand new school as a sophomore or Junior because the SB believes they are too soft and that the stress of a forced new high school would be good character development for them.

This is not hyperbole. That is the sentiment expressed in the governance meeting yesterday.

They changed the draft yesterday. It used to say "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and phasing . .. " and now it reads "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and limited phasing . .. ", so they are planning on seniors only. This is a complete disaster. Need to get organized and head this off ASAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A focus right now should be the policy they are working on - 8130.

Everyone should let them know, whether you think you’re up for a boundary change or not, that it is unacceptable to only grandfather in high school seniors to a boundary change. At a minimum, juniors and seniors should have the option to finish high school where they started. I’d personally prefer changes to start with a freshman class.

And they are working on language for “expedited boundary changes” needing only public notice vs. public hearings if less than 15% of the school is moved.

If you communicate with a SB member right now, they are passing the buck, saying their only focus is policy 8130 and the Superintendent will use it to implement changes.

Let’s make sure those two reasonable items are included in that policy.

Yep, let the board know if you want your freshman or sophomore to stay with their friends in high school, rather than be sent to a brand new school as a sophomore or Junior because the SB believes they are too soft and that the stress of a forced new high school would be good character development for them.

This is not hyperbole. That is the sentiment expressed in the governance meeting yesterday.

They changed the draft yesterday. It used to say "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and phasing . .. " and now it reads "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and limited phasing . .. ", so they are planning on seniors only. This is a complete disaster. Need to get organized and head this off ASAP.

It’s the only way that they’ll be able to redistrict every five years because if they do four years worth of grandfathering then there is no way it’ll help with the bus routes or efficiency.

If you want to kill the senior-only grandfathering plan you have to just say no to this ridiculous redistricting exercise altogether.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A focus right now should be the policy they are working on - 8130.

Everyone should let them know, whether you think you’re up for a boundary change or not, that it is unacceptable to only grandfather in high school seniors to a boundary change. At a minimum, juniors and seniors should have the option to finish high school where they started. I’d personally prefer changes to start with a freshman class.

And they are working on language for “expedited boundary changes” needing only public notice vs. public hearings if less than 15% of the school is moved.

If you communicate with a SB member right now, they are passing the buck, saying their only focus is policy 8130 and the Superintendent will use it to implement changes.

Let’s make sure those two reasonable items are included in that policy.

Yep, let the board know if you want your freshman or sophomore to stay with their friends in high school, rather than be sent to a brand new school as a sophomore or Junior because the SB believes they are too soft and that the stress of a forced new high school would be good character development for them.

This is not hyperbole. That is the sentiment expressed in the governance meeting yesterday.

They changed the draft yesterday. It used to say "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and phasing . .. " and now it reads "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and limited phasing . .. ", so they are planning on seniors only. This is a complete disaster. Need to get organized and head this off ASAP.

It’s the only way that they’ll be able to redistrict every five years because if they do four years worth of grandfathering then there is no way it’ll help with the bus routes or efficiency.

If you want to kill the senior-only grandfathering plan you have to just say no to this ridiculous redistricting exercise altogether.

Totally agree. It is just so shady they way that they are doing this in non-recorded meetings with so much pretext and hidden agenda. Thank you to whoever attended yesterday and helped spread the word. These SB members are not your "representatives" and do not care about what the families in their districts want.

[Anonymous]

Someone needs to bring this to the attention of Youngkin, Sears, and Miyares. This is a PR goldmine for Republicans wanting to highlight how out-of-touch and despotic the local Democrats have become in NoVa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A focus right now should be the policy they are working on - 8130.

Everyone should let them know, whether you think you’re up for a boundary change or not, that it is unacceptable to only grandfather in high school seniors to a boundary change. At a minimum, juniors and seniors should have the option to finish high school where they started. I’d personally prefer changes to start with a freshman class.

And they are working on language for “expedited boundary changes” needing only public notice vs. public hearings if less than 15% of the school is moved.

If you communicate with a SB member right now, they are passing the buck, saying their only focus is policy 8130 and the Superintendent will use it to implement changes.

Let’s make sure those two reasonable items are included in that policy.

Yep, let the board know if you want your freshman or sophomore to stay with their friends in high school, rather than be sent to a brand new school as a sophomore or Junior because the SB believes they are too soft and that the stress of a forced new high school would be good character development for them.

This is not hyperbole. That is the sentiment expressed in the governance meeting yesterday.

They changed the draft yesterday. It used to say "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and phasing . .. " and now it reads "adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and limited phasing . .. ", so they are planning on seniors only. This is a complete disaster. Need to get organized and head this off ASAP.

It’s the only way that they’ll be able to redistrict every five years because if they do four years worth of grandfathering then there is no way it’ll help with the bus routes or efficiency.

If you want to kill the senior-only grandfathering plan you have to just say no to this ridiculous redistricting exercise altogether.

Totally agree. It is just so shady they way that they are doing this in non-recorded meetings with so much pretext and hidden agenda. Thank you to whoever attended yesterday and helped spread the word. These SB members are not your "representatives" and do not care about what the families in their districts want.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs to bring this to the attention of Youngkin, Sears, and Miyares. This is a PR goldmine for Republicans wanting to highlight how out-of-touch and despotic the local Democrats have become in NoVa.

I think their changes will be well received by the county and most of their constituents. I think many underestimate how popular these public school initiatives have become.

Seattle public schools recently eliminated their version of AAP in the name of equity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs to bring this to the attention of Youngkin, Sears, and Miyares. This is a PR goldmine for Republicans wanting to highlight how out-of-touch and despotic the local Democrats have become in NoVa.

I think their changes will be well received by the county and most of their constituents. I think many underestimate how popular these public school initiatives have become.

Seattle public schools recently eliminated their version of AAP in the name of equity.

I think you are wrong. But I guess we will see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs to bring this to the attention of Youngkin, Sears, and Miyares. This is a PR goldmine for Republicans wanting to highlight how out-of-touch and despotic the local Democrats have become in NoVa.

I plan to reach out to Youngkin on this soon. It really is such a boon for their party.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs to bring this to the attention of Youngkin, Sears, and Miyares. This is a PR goldmine for Republicans wanting to highlight how out-of-touch and despotic the local Democrats have become in NoVa.

I think their changes will be well received by the county and most of their constituents. I think many underestimate how popular these public school initiatives have become.

Seattle public schools recently eliminated their version of AAP in the name of equity.

I think you are wrong. But I guess we will see.

Of course she’s wrong. She wants to believe it, but there is zero chance that parents in the county are okay with a county wide realignment and ongoing uncertainty.

It’s not even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs to bring this to the attention of Youngkin, Sears, and Miyares. This is a PR goldmine for Republicans wanting to highlight how out-of-touch and despotic the local Democrats have become in NoVa.

I think their changes will be well received by the county and most of their constituents. I think many underestimate how popular these public school initiatives have become.

Seattle public schools recently eliminated their version of AAP in the name of equity.

I think you are wrong. But I guess we will see.

The changes to the TJ admissions process seem to be along similar lines and that was well-received. Sure a handful of people were upset, but I think it had overall popular support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs to bring this to the attention of Youngkin, Sears, and Miyares. This is a PR goldmine for Republicans wanting to highlight how out-of-touch and despotic the local Democrats have become in NoVa.

I think their changes will be well received by the county and most of their constituents. I think many underestimate how popular these public school initiatives have become.

Seattle public schools recently eliminated their version of AAP in the name of equity.

+1