Impact of McLean/Langley boundary change on McLean real estate choice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any house within a mile of route 7 needs to go to Herndon. Period.

Route 7 spans from Leesburg to Alexandria, so no.

The riskiest places to buy are:

1. Forestville south of 7 where the neighborhoods are woven within Herndon neighborhoods.
2. The Spring Hill attendance island that’s currently zoned for McLean with the assumption it’ll be sent to Langley.
3. Streets off Seneca Rd (although I think this is less likely.)

I don’t see them taking Forestville out of the Langley Pyramid or turning it into a split feeder. They will move neighborhoods out of Forestville into Herndon elementary schools with the capacity to take them. Forestville boundaries will then shift to pick up Colvin Run neighborhoods which will shift to pick up Spring Hill neighborhoods.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/SY2024-25ElementarySchoolBoundarieswithHighSchoolBoundaries.pdf

Add to that the Colvin Run neighborhood[s] that are woven within Forest Edge/South Lakes. Remove the Churchill Rd modular and it's down 252 in capacity. Springhill is projected over capacity so that island could be moved to Westbriar?

All we really know for certain is the at large school board members need to finally start performing their roles. The problem is not Forestville assigned to Langley but who is currently in boundary for Forestville.

They should do something with the Westbriar island before they worry about the Spring Hill island. The kids in the Westbriar island travel past Colvin Run on their way to Westbriar. The kids in the Spring Hill island are contiguous to the rest of Spring Hill, and they don’t travel past Langley on their way to McLean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DW works in real estate with a lot of clients from South Korea moving to the DMV, and everyone of them is aware of the potential school boundary changes. Their first choice is TJ with the backup school is Langley HS, and because of that, they want to buy real estate within one mile from Langley HS.

Most people buying within a mile of Langley send their kids to private school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DW works in real estate with a lot of clients from South Korea moving to the DMV, and everyone of them is aware of the potential school boundary changes. Their first choice is TJ with the backup school is Langley HS, and because of that, they want to buy real estate within one mile from Langley HS.

Most people buying within a mile of Langley send their kids to private school.

I live on Harvey Road literally next to Langley HS, and my kids go to Langley, as most of my friends who live next to Cooper MS. I would say about 50% of Langley residents send their kids to private.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

So houses elsewhere may sell for more if the market is factoring in the possibility of changes that might increase test scores and school ratings at the assigned schools for those areas.

This isn’t about information asymmetry, but instead your own navel gazing.

Cute theory. I feel quite confident that most families do not like uncertainty when it comes to their kids’ schools. That’ll hurt property values across the county.

Soon we’ll see whether you and Sandy Anderson are right. If you’re wrong, what will you do to save the sinking ship? I’m guessing you and the school board have zero plans for when this blows up in their face. Sounds about right for the equity-at-all-cost activists.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

So houses elsewhere may sell for more if the market is factoring in the possibility of changes that might increase test scores and school ratings at the assigned schools for those areas.

This isn’t about information asymmetry, but instead your own navel gazing.

Cute theory. I feel quite confident that most families do not like uncertainty when it comes to their kids’ schools. That’ll hurt property values across the county.

Soon we’ll see whether you and Sandy Anderson are right. If you’re wrong, what will you do to save the sinking ship? I’m guessing you and the school board have zero plans for when this blows up in their face. Sounds about right for the equity-at-all-cost activists.

It’s entirely possible that boundary changes could, in the aggregate, be negative for FCPS performance metrics and county tax revenues. But it’s not as one-sided a picture as you keep claiming. If western Great Falls gets moved to Herndon, there will still be buyers for homes and many kids will still attend the assigned public schools.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

So houses elsewhere may sell for more if the market is factoring in the possibility of changes that might increase test scores and school ratings at the assigned schools for those areas.

This isn’t about information asymmetry, but instead your own navel gazing.

Cute theory. I feel quite confident that most families do not like uncertainty when it comes to their kids’ schools. That’ll hurt property values across the county.

Soon we’ll see whether you and Sandy Anderson are right. If you’re wrong, what will you do to save the sinking ship? I’m guessing you and the school board have zero plans for when this blows up in their face. Sounds about right for the equity-at-all-cost activists.

It’s entirely possible that boundary changes could, in the aggregate, be negative for FCPS performance metrics and county tax revenues. But it’s not as one-sided a picture as you keep claiming. If western Great Falls gets moved to Herndon, there will still be buyers for homes and many kids will still attend the assigned public schools.

I never claimed that there wouldn’t be buyers, and I’ll even admit that some limited areas could see incremental gains to their property values. Most will absolutely take an hit. Uncertainty and no grandfathering with changes every five years is going to be bad. So very very bad.

I don’t think anyone can sit there with a straight face and say this won’t have a negative impact on the county.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

You're vastly overestimating the information asymmetry aspect, likely influenced by your one anecdote. Housing demand (and hence property values) in this area are going to be far more affected by Trump's DOGE and any corresponding downsizing/relocating of agencies than by concerns over boundaries. And as another poster noted, any such boundary-related impacts would be short-term and quickly rebound, though in the meantime I know people certainly enjoy trying to make political hay out of doomsdaying this appropriate and responsible course of action.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

You're vastly overestimating the information asymmetry aspect, likely influenced by your one anecdote. Housing demand (and hence property values) in this area are going to be far more affected by Trump's DOGE and any corresponding downsizing/relocating of agencies than by concerns over boundaries. And as another poster noted, any such boundary-related impacts would be short-term and quickly rebound, though in the meantime I know people certainly enjoy trying to make political hay out of doomsdaying this appropriate and responsible course of action.

So, definitely not just one anecdote. Multiple listings (even right at this very moment) heralding the school district - you’re just too lazy to go look for them.

The doge may introduce some risk, but so theoretical at this point, and they have to get through a lot of constituencies first. Seems very unlikely to amount to anything significant.

You just don’t seem that great at evaluating risks.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

You're vastly overestimating the information asymmetry aspect, likely influenced by your one anecdote. Housing demand (and hence property values) in this area are going to be far more affected by Trump's DOGE and any corresponding downsizing/relocating of agencies than by concerns over boundaries. And as another poster noted, any such boundary-related impacts would be short-term and quickly rebound, though in the meantime I know people certainly enjoy trying to make political hay out of doomsdaying this appropriate and responsible course of action.

So, definitely not just one anecdote. Multiple listings (even right at this very moment) heralding the school district - you’re just too lazy to go look for them.

The doge may introduce some risk, but so theoretical at this point, and they have to get through a lot of constituencies first. Seems very unlikely to amount to anything significant.

You just don’t seem that great at evaluating risks.

One other thing to add: realtors can’t really talk about schools and most people aren’t coming to DCUM regularly. I would wager a hefty sum that a family from outside the potentially impacted areas would have a small likelihood of anything of this magnitude going on. Frankly, most of us wouldn’t have considered it- because it’s completely bonkers.

So the information asymmetry is significant.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

You're vastly overestimating the information asymmetry aspect, likely influenced by your one anecdote. Housing demand (and hence property values) in this area are going to be far more affected by Trump's DOGE and any corresponding downsizing/relocating of agencies than by concerns over boundaries. And as another poster noted, any such boundary-related impacts would be short-term and quickly rebound, though in the meantime I know people certainly enjoy trying to make political hay out of doomsdaying this appropriate and responsible course of action.

DP. The information asymmetry isn’t between buyers and sellers, who basically have the same information. It’s between buyers and sellers, on the one hand, and public officials, who may not be showing their hand as to their real intentions when it comes to boundaries.

It’s a fancy term that didn’t need to be part of the discussion. PP is right that people don’t like uncertainty when making major decisions, and may be less likely to enter into commercial transactions like buying or selling a house until the uncertainty is resolved. In the case of FCPS, the suggestion that they may revisit boundaries every five years just adds to the uncertainty.

In a county like Loudoun, where the schools are generally similar to one another and there are frequent boundary changes as new schools are built, the uncertainty may not have as big as effect, even if some would really like to attend Stone Bridge, Briar Woods, Independence, etc. but in the case of Fairfax, the differences among schools are more pronounced, so the uncertainty can be expected to have a bigger impact.

[Anonymous]

Doesn't FCPS's action now to do a comprehensive adjustment make it so that FCPS is more similar to Loudoun? In the sense that, as has been claimed, LCPS schools are generally similar and so boundary changes don't cause so much hassle there when they come about.

If FCPS moves to that model of generally similar schools, that should be viewed as a positive for all Fairfax residents, especially prospective residents who would have many options instead of only the top 5 FCPS schools being acceptable.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

You're vastly overestimating the information asymmetry aspect, likely influenced by your one anecdote. Housing demand (and hence property values) in this area are going to be far more affected by Trump's DOGE and any corresponding downsizing/relocating of agencies than by concerns over boundaries. And as another poster noted, any such boundary-related impacts would be short-term and quickly rebound, though in the meantime I know people certainly enjoy trying to make political hay out of doomsdaying this appropriate and responsible course of action.

DP. The information asymmetry isn’t between buyers and sellers, who basically have the same information. It’s between buyers and sellers, on the one hand, and public officials, who may not be showing their hand as to their real intentions when it comes to boundaries.

It’s a fancy term that didn’t need to be part of the discussion. PP is right that people don’t like uncertainty when making major decisions, and may be less likely to enter into commercial transactions like buying or selling a house until the uncertainty is resolved. In the case of FCPS, the suggestion that they may revisit boundaries every five years just adds to the uncertainty.

In a county like Loudoun, where the schools are generally similar to one another and there are frequent boundary changes as new schools are built, the uncertainty may not have as big as effect, even if some would really like to attend Stone Bridge, Briar Woods, Independence, etc. but in the case of Fairfax, the differences among schools are more pronounced, so the uncertainty can be expected to have a bigger impact.

Buyers and sellers have access to most of the same information, but buyers don’t know they need to look for it. It’s such a ridiculous proposition that a school board would make these crazy changes that it isn’t on most families’ radars. That’s the asymmetry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't FCPS's action now to do a comprehensive adjustment make it so that FCPS is more similar to Loudoun? In the sense that, as has been claimed, LCPS schools are generally similar and so boundary changes don't cause so much hassle there when they come about.

If FCPS moves to that model of generally similar schools, that should be viewed as a positive for all Fairfax residents, especially prospective residents who would have many options instead of only the top 5 FCPS schools being acceptable.

Gosh, really betting the farm on a home and a prayer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't FCPS's action now to do a comprehensive adjustment make it so that FCPS is more similar to Loudoun? In the sense that, as has been claimed, LCPS schools are generally similar and so boundary changes don't cause so much hassle there when they come about.

If FCPS moves to that model of generally similar schools, that should be viewed as a positive for all Fairfax residents, especially prospective residents who would have many options instead of only the top 5 FCPS schools being acceptable.

That’s a misreading of both what people want and what FCPS can accomplish. Loudoun may be like Fairfax circa 1980 but Fairfax and Loudoun are quite different now.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are trying to stay in the Langley pyramid only because we have a child at Cooper who wants to stay with her friends. We have already had quite a bit of disruption for this particular child and need to limit it going forward.

That said, does anyone have thoughts on when we might know the final decisions about potential changes in the pyramid? Are we looking at six months, a year, two years? I really have no idea.

It does seem to me like a logical change, albeit a sad one for many in the Langley community, would be to cut off the western part of Great Falls and Herndon or South Lakes. I personally think that is a likely outcome.

What I do not know is what will likely happen to McLean and the east side of the Langley boundary. For example, there are homes near downtown McLean that are closer to likely than McLean. Will all of these likely stay zoned to McLean?

To be clear, I am not interested in debating the merits of rezoning, and I know that nobody can predict the future. I’m just wondering if anyone with more knowledge about this particular area than me has any thoughts on what may be most likely to happen in the future.

I have significant thoughts and extensive knowledge of that area, but I would never share insight with someone who says that the change is logical.

If you think that the change is logical, good luck figuring it all out. In the meantime, stop trying to buy your way out of the situation.

You’re gross to want to insulate your child at the expense of your neighbors.

This is a weird response. Lots of kids want to stay at the same school.

That didn’t offend me, it’s the poster saying that the move is logical and then asking how she can avoid the consequences for her child.

what are you talking about?? anybody is free to buy a home anyplace they want, at any time, if they want to be in a certain school district. That is probably the #1 factor that families look at when choosing where to buy. I lived in Arlington for years, and then bought my current home in Great Falls because I wanted my kids to go to Langley. People will always make those type of choices, before, during, and after any boundary changes. if you find that gross or offensive, you have issues.

Sure, but again, she just seems preoccupied with her own delicate child and her own situation, while being fine with throwing her daughter’s friends under the equity bus. Go back and read her original question.

I read it and I still can't understand why you have an issue. once the new boundaries are announced, everyone will assess their options (go to the new school, buy a new home zoned for the old school, or go private) and do what is the best fit for their son or daughter. why does that bother you?

Let me reframe it for you. If she is rich enough to be able to afford a McLean home post-divorce, then none of the sjws who have been paying attention will help her out.

So she’s looking to the other block of people who are paying attention for help, which is western gf. Any help that she would get from them goes out the window when she says that it is logical that their kids get moved. A bite the hand that feeds you type situation.

Oh well, like I said, T&P to her.

There have already been people giving her advice, and they don’t necessarily fall in your convenient buckets. They are just telling her which areas are generally perceived to be at greater risk of redistricting.

I’m sorry if you live in one of those areas and don’t want to be redistricted but anyone who bought that far away from Langley should have known they were taking a risk.

Yep, she should understand she’s taking a risk buying anywhere in Fairfax county. Sucks to be her, or really, anyone who is about to get jammed up by this school board. Or really any Fairfax county resident who is about to see their school system severely diminished in the name of equity.

I am confused about how rezoning is going to address equity. People buy houses where they want to live and where they want to send their children to school. Rezoning will not change that basic fact. People will move. Does anyone actually have real information that this is about equity or is it just paranoia?

And to the lady who is fixated on how the OP says it boundary changes are logical but wants to know how she can get around it: so if she rationalized that the boundary changes are completely illogical (as apparently you have) then she'd be a better person worth giving advice? Whether you think they are logical or not is unrelated to your own interest in where your child goes to school and doing what you can to keep them where you would like them to be.

There are significant transaction costs associated with moving. People will come on here and say they’ll move if they get redistricted because they want the School Board to think that changing boundaries won’t achieve the intended purpose, whether it’s changing the demographics at a school or just trying to change enrollments. But only a fraction of people will be willing to incur moving costs, so they are stuck.

Hahahahaaaa. Dumbest thing I’ve read today.

It’s obviously correct but guess it hits too close to home for you.

I am already aware of five housing decisions (selling, walking away from a contract, etc.) in my neck of the woods made based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries.

But sure, do blather on about how only a fraction of people are willing to incur moving costs.

“Sorry Susie, I know we could afford it, and I know we moved here for the schools, and I know there are safety concerns and school quality concerns and you’ll end up with an inferior education, but we just didn’t want to pay for the cost of moving.” - said no parent in the history of the world 🙄

So you're saying 5 buyers have made the decision to move into your neck of the woods based on the mere prospect of being impacted by boundaries?

It’s actually seven. Countless others have told me that there is no way their kids would go to the potentially redistricted school. I concede that some of that may be bluster, but to argue that it is mostly bluster is just flat wrong.

People with means have and will use that money for their kids’ educations. The people who remain can’t afford to go or have fully subscribed to the equity agenda.

Sorry, just reread your post. it's selling or walking away, not buying. seven (including us by the way - for full disclosure).

Confused how you are selling if there are no buyers. Are you selling to investors and the houses are all just sitting empty now? Eventually someone is going to rent or buy and live there. In many but not all cases a family with kids (or who plan to have them). People selling and moving out isn't a net reduction in students or tax revenue or anything else unless that land is being redeveloped or you have a bunch of empty-nesters buying and moving in (contrary to the broader trend in the area).

Go take an Econ class. Information asymmetry. Homes for sale in our area prominently state the school pyramid, which is still valid. That’s why one buyer walked away from a purchase after subsequently learning the plans. Sellers know, many buyers don’t.

Also, it is absolutely a reduction in the tax base if homes sell for less. This hasn’t been fully priced in yet because the maps aren’t public, but that’ll change next year.

Like I said, go take an Econ class. 🙄

You're vastly overestimating the information asymmetry aspect, likely influenced by your one anecdote. Housing demand (and hence property values) in this area are going to be far more affected by Trump's DOGE and any corresponding downsizing/relocating of agencies than by concerns over boundaries. And as another poster noted, any such boundary-related impacts would be short-term and quickly rebound, though in the meantime I know people certainly enjoy trying to make political hay out of doomsdaying this appropriate and responsible course of action.

DP. The information asymmetry isn’t between buyers and sellers, who basically have the same information. It’s between buyers and sellers, on the one hand, and public officials, who may not be showing their hand as to their real intentions when it comes to boundaries.

It’s a fancy term that didn’t need to be part of the discussion. PP is right that people don’t like uncertainty when making major decisions, and may be less likely to enter into commercial transactions like buying or selling a house until the uncertainty is resolved. In the case of FCPS, the suggestion that they may revisit boundaries every five years just adds to the uncertainty.

In a county like Loudoun, where the schools are generally similar to one another and there are frequent boundary changes as new schools are built, the uncertainty may not have as big as effect, even if some would really like to attend Stone Bridge, Briar Woods, Independence, etc. but in the case of Fairfax, the differences among schools are more pronounced, so the uncertainty can be expected to have a bigger impact.

Buyers and sellers have access to most of the same information, but buyers don’t know they need to look for it. It’s such a ridiculous proposition that a school board would make these crazy changes that it isn’t on most families’ radars. That’s the asymmetry

If that’s the case it would be easier for aggrieved sellers to unload their homes and you would be urging your neighbors to capitalize on it rather than complaining about it.