Chantilly High or Langley?

[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:Those are two very different communities and your housing budget would place you in very different social places - you’d be rich at Chantilly and poor at Langley. What are your other priorities?

You would not be poor at Langley. You’d be average.

- Langley mom

In 2022, a $1.1-1.2M housing budget means you're below-average economically in the Langley HS district.

But someone has to be, as there's always a distribution. The Langley district is spread out and I don't think people are spending much time keeping tabs on who lives in the more affordable areas, which in Langley's case means (1) western Great Falls near Loudoun, (2) the Vienna neighborhoods off Route 7, and (3) the Kings Manor townhouses in McLean. Teaching your kids they can't always have everything some other kid has is a valuable lesson.

DP. You are correct that no one who actually goes to Langley thinks about or talks about the wealth of their peers. Curiously, that seems to be the sole purview of people whose kids go to school elsewhere.

How fantastic that OP has the benefit of the views of some random Langley mom who constantly pretends she knows what everyone in her pyramid thinks or says.

If I were the OP (who, btw, is probably a troll), I'd much prefer hearing from people with actual experience with said schools, rather than those who constantly make up absurd claims because they know nothing about it.

Personally I’d prefer hearing from someone humble enough to only speak for themselves and who wasn’t pushing some candy-coated narrative. Give us the good and the bad if you want to be taken seriously.

Plenty of us have done just that. It's the good that you don't want to hear - you can't stand hearing the good, in fact. We've pointed out that many of us are indeed middle class, live in small homes, drive minivans, etc. We simply don't have this weird inferiority complex that some of you so clearly have. Is there wealth in this area? Of course. There are also neighborhoods of modest homes and far less wealthy people. No one cares. No one but you, that is.

Nobody actually cares about your middle-class or wealthy lifestyle. The only thing we care about relevant to Langley is how the School Board continues to misuse the space available in the Langley pyramid for relieving overcrowding and concentration of FARMs children in surrounding areas.

I realize that I am beating a dead horse, but where are these magical people who can be moved into Langley? As a PP noted, the communites abutting's Langley boundaries are also primarily upper middle class and above. The only way to materially change Langley's current economic diversity is to draw an incredibly awkward boundary map, which is the same thing that a certain group of people complain about with regard to Langley's boundary extending to the Loudoun border. In fact, it's even more awkward because you'd literally need to have kids bypassing closer schools -- on the same route -- to get them to Langley. Anyone trying to have it both ways is just trying to pick a fight.

+ a million
The people who constantly grouse about this simply won't admit that what they're advocating for is social engineering. Plain and simple.

No dog in this fight but get serious. There isn't a better example of "social engineering" to be found in FCPS that making sure Langley has no poors.

Yup. This is a well known fact. And precisely the reason my kid will attend MHS although he could have transferred to Langley (for language). Place your kids in a decent school with values that align with yours, in my opinion.

That’s nice. Still waiting on those examples of magical FARMs kids who could be reassigned to Langley. Crickets.

I already addressed this:
"Boundaries are already incredibly awkward in the majority of pyramids, except that they've existed in this way for decades so they seem normal to everyone. It's also not awkward for students to bypass closer schools, that currently happens across the entire county near the borders of each boundary. People who live along the edges are almost certainly closer to another school than the one they are assigned to."

So there, a simple re-drawing of boundaries could put any number of FARMs students at Langley, just look at the Herndon area. Again, their proximity to HHS is irrelevant because we already established an understanding that it is completely normal for kids to live much closer to other schools yet are assigned to another. Look at Hayfield and Woodson boundaries for goodness' sake.

Just to confirm, then: you have no problem with all of Great Falls going to Langley (which must be the case if you are advocating for more of Herndon to go to Langley).

Can’t wait to see PP try and squirm out of that one!

Huh? It's fine if all of GF goes to Langley, there's still space for Langley to absorb a low-income apartment complex or two. All I am advocating for is that every FCPS high school take on some low-income apartments to distribute poverty. I don't understand why that is met with such contention. I mean, I do understand why Langley parents would feel that way, but I don't understand how you think it's actually defensible to fight against poor kids enrolling in a public school.

There is so much cognitive dissonance in this thread.

I don’t think many Langley parents would care if there were more lower-income students. I certainly can’t imagine that any of our neighbors would care. That argument is a straw man. But it’s also a fact that Langley’s geography makes adding meaningful economic diversity very difficult.

But the whole “add more lower-income students” argument is entirely at odds with the “don’t be the (relatively) poor person at Langley” argument. If Langley is so miserable for those who are merely middle class, who exactly are you benefiting by gerrymandering economic diversity?

Gee, you might almost think there are multiple posters on the thread.

In any case, the Langley parents are pretty good at quickly suggesting that, sadly, there are insurmountable barriers to greater diversity at Langley while claiming that, of course, they’d be welcoming if only there were a way to overcome them. Talk about cognitive dissonance…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Perhaps our Board of Supervisors, which is so deeply committed to "One Fairfax," should prioritize the construction of affordable housing within Langley's current boundaries, especially the area closest to Great Falls Village. That's the most walkable part of Great Falls, and bus service could run from GFV to Metro, so it might well make sense to incentivize developers to build affordable housing there like the county is doing at this site in Tysons in the Marshall HS district:

https://www.insidenova.com/news/fairfax/fairfax-supervisors-ok-33m-in-funding-for-tysons-affordable-housing-effort/article_5410b3f8-8387-11ec-8517-7724a8f77bbc.html

The problem with these ideas is that they ignore reality. Two obvious issues:

1. Where would you build this level housing? There is no available land near Great Falls Village.

2. Even if there were land (and the zoning could be changed), there is no sewer service and you aren’t building higher density housing on septic (and certainly not lower-cost housing).

Where there's a will, there's a way. If it needs to be in the part of Great Falls that isn't on septic, so be it.

DP. As the PP stated, you are ignoring reality. This will never happen - but I think you know that. Great Falls is an historic, low-density, semi-rural area and the vast majority of neighborhoods are on septic. There will never be high density housing built there.

Many areas in NoVa are historic and were once low-density and semi-rural. Get over yourself.

I'm simply stating a fact. Knock yourself out trying.

[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:Those are two very different communities and your housing budget would place you in very different social places - you’d be rich at Chantilly and poor at Langley. What are your other priorities?

You would not be poor at Langley. You’d be average.

- Langley mom

In 2022, a $1.1-1.2M housing budget means you're below-average economically in the Langley HS district.

But someone has to be, as there's always a distribution. The Langley district is spread out and I don't think people are spending much time keeping tabs on who lives in the more affordable areas, which in Langley's case means (1) western Great Falls near Loudoun, (2) the Vienna neighborhoods off Route 7, and (3) the Kings Manor townhouses in McLean. Teaching your kids they can't always have everything some other kid has is a valuable lesson.

DP. You are correct that no one who actually goes to Langley thinks about or talks about the wealth of their peers. Curiously, that seems to be the sole purview of people whose kids go to school elsewhere.

How fantastic that OP has the benefit of the views of some random Langley mom who constantly pretends she knows what everyone in her pyramid thinks or says.

If I were the OP (who, btw, is probably a troll), I'd much prefer hearing from people with actual experience with said schools, rather than those who constantly make up absurd claims because they know nothing about it.

Personally I’d prefer hearing from someone humble enough to only speak for themselves and who wasn’t pushing some candy-coated narrative. Give us the good and the bad if you want to be taken seriously.

Plenty of us have done just that. It's the good that you don't want to hear - you can't stand hearing the good, in fact. We've pointed out that many of us are indeed middle class, live in small homes, drive minivans, etc. We simply don't have this weird inferiority complex that some of you so clearly have. Is there wealth in this area? Of course. There are also neighborhoods of modest homes and far less wealthy people. No one cares. No one but you, that is.

Nobody actually cares about your middle-class or wealthy lifestyle. The only thing we care about relevant to Langley is how the School Board continues to misuse the space available in the Langley pyramid for relieving overcrowding and concentration of FARMs children in surrounding areas.

I realize that I am beating a dead horse, but where are these magical people who can be moved into Langley? As a PP noted, the communites abutting's Langley boundaries are also primarily upper middle class and above. The only way to materially change Langley's current economic diversity is to draw an incredibly awkward boundary map, which is the same thing that a certain group of people complain about with regard to Langley's boundary extending to the Loudoun border. In fact, it's even more awkward because you'd literally need to have kids bypassing closer schools -- on the same route -- to get them to Langley. Anyone trying to have it both ways is just trying to pick a fight.

+ a million
The people who constantly grouse about this simply won't admit that what they're advocating for is social engineering. Plain and simple.

No dog in this fight but get serious. There isn't a better example of "social engineering" to be found in FCPS that making sure Langley has no poors.

Yup. This is a well known fact. And precisely the reason my kid will attend MHS although he could have transferred to Langley (for language). Place your kids in a decent school with values that align with yours, in my opinion.

That’s nice. Still waiting on those examples of magical FARMs kids who could be reassigned to Langley. Crickets.

I already addressed this:
"Boundaries are already incredibly awkward in the majority of pyramids, except that they've existed in this way for decades so they seem normal to everyone. It's also not awkward for students to bypass closer schools, that currently happens across the entire county near the borders of each boundary. People who live along the edges are almost certainly closer to another school than the one they are assigned to."

So there, a simple re-drawing of boundaries could put any number of FARMs students at Langley, just look at the Herndon area. Again, their proximity to HHS is irrelevant because we already established an understanding that it is completely normal for kids to live much closer to other schools yet are assigned to another. Look at Hayfield and Woodson boundaries for goodness' sake.

Just to confirm, then: you have no problem with all of Great Falls going to Langley (which must be the case if you are advocating for more of Herndon to go to Langley).

Can’t wait to see PP try and squirm out of that one!

Huh? It's fine if all of GF goes to Langley, there's still space for Langley to absorb a low-income apartment complex or two. All I am advocating for is that every FCPS high school take on some low-income apartments to distribute poverty. I don't understand why that is met with such contention. I mean, I do understand why Langley parents would feel that way, but I don't understand how you think it's actually defensible to fight against poor kids enrolling in a public school.

There is so much cognitive dissonance in this thread.

I don’t think many Langley parents would care if there were more lower-income students. I certainly can’t imagine that any of our neighbors would care. That argument is a straw man. But it’s also a fact that Langley’s geography makes adding meaningful economic diversity very difficult.

But the whole “add more lower-income students” argument is entirely at odds with the “don’t be the (relatively) poor person at Langley” argument. If Langley is so miserable for those who are merely middle class, who exactly are you benefiting by gerrymandering economic diversity?

DP
+ a million
You're making far too much sense for this thread. The only reason these posters keep insisting "poor people" be bused to Langley is because they themselves can't get over their seething hatred and resentment that the geography is what it is. That is the ONLY reason. And that's why no one takes them seriously.

[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:Those are two very different communities and your housing budget would place you in very different social places - you’d be rich at Chantilly and poor at Langley. What are your other priorities?

You would not be poor at Langley. You’d be average.

- Langley mom

In 2022, a $1.1-1.2M housing budget means you're below-average economically in the Langley HS district.

But someone has to be, as there's always a distribution. The Langley district is spread out and I don't think people are spending much time keeping tabs on who lives in the more affordable areas, which in Langley's case means (1) western Great Falls near Loudoun, (2) the Vienna neighborhoods off Route 7, and (3) the Kings Manor townhouses in McLean. Teaching your kids they can't always have everything some other kid has is a valuable lesson.

DP. You are correct that no one who actually goes to Langley thinks about or talks about the wealth of their peers. Curiously, that seems to be the sole purview of people whose kids go to school elsewhere.

How fantastic that OP has the benefit of the views of some random Langley mom who constantly pretends she knows what everyone in her pyramid thinks or says.

If I were the OP (who, btw, is probably a troll), I'd much prefer hearing from people with actual experience with said schools, rather than those who constantly make up absurd claims because they know nothing about it.

Personally I’d prefer hearing from someone humble enough to only speak for themselves and who wasn’t pushing some candy-coated narrative. Give us the good and the bad if you want to be taken seriously.

Plenty of us have done just that. It's the good that you don't want to hear - you can't stand hearing the good, in fact. We've pointed out that many of us are indeed middle class, live in small homes, drive minivans, etc. We simply don't have this weird inferiority complex that some of you so clearly have. Is there wealth in this area? Of course. There are also neighborhoods of modest homes and far less wealthy people. No one cares. No one but you, that is.

Nobody actually cares about your middle-class or wealthy lifestyle. The only thing we care about relevant to Langley is how the School Board continues to misuse the space available in the Langley pyramid for relieving overcrowding and concentration of FARMs children in surrounding areas.

I realize that I am beating a dead horse, but where are these magical people who can be moved into Langley? As a PP noted, the communites abutting's Langley boundaries are also primarily upper middle class and above. The only way to materially change Langley's current economic diversity is to draw an incredibly awkward boundary map, which is the same thing that a certain group of people complain about with regard to Langley's boundary extending to the Loudoun border. In fact, it's even more awkward because you'd literally need to have kids bypassing closer schools -- on the same route -- to get them to Langley. Anyone trying to have it both ways is just trying to pick a fight.

+ a million
The people who constantly grouse about this simply won't admit that what they're advocating for is social engineering. Plain and simple.

No dog in this fight but get serious. There isn't a better example of "social engineering" to be found in FCPS that making sure Langley has no poors.

Yup. This is a well known fact. And precisely the reason my kid will attend MHS although he could have transferred to Langley (for language). Place your kids in a decent school with values that align with yours, in my opinion.

That’s nice. Still waiting on those examples of magical FARMs kids who could be reassigned to Langley. Crickets.

I already addressed this:
"Boundaries are already incredibly awkward in the majority of pyramids, except that they've existed in this way for decades so they seem normal to everyone. It's also not awkward for students to bypass closer schools, that currently happens across the entire county near the borders of each boundary. People who live along the edges are almost certainly closer to another school than the one they are assigned to."

So there, a simple re-drawing of boundaries could put any number of FARMs students at Langley, just look at the Herndon area. Again, their proximity to HHS is irrelevant because we already established an understanding that it is completely normal for kids to live much closer to other schools yet are assigned to another. Look at Hayfield and Woodson boundaries for goodness' sake.

Just to confirm, then: you have no problem with all of Great Falls going to Langley (which must be the case if you are advocating for more of Herndon to go to Langley).

Can’t wait to see PP try and squirm out of that one!

Huh? It's fine if all of GF goes to Langley, there's still space for Langley to absorb a low-income apartment complex or two. All I am advocating for is that every FCPS high school take on some low-income apartments to distribute poverty. I don't understand why that is met with such contention. I mean, I do understand why Langley parents would feel that way, but I don't understand how you think it's actually defensible to fight against poor kids enrolling in a public school.

There is so much cognitive dissonance in this thread.

I don’t think many Langley parents would care if there were more lower-income students. I certainly can’t imagine that any of our neighbors would care. That argument is a straw man. But it’s also a fact that Langley’s geography makes adding meaningful economic diversity very difficult.

But the whole “add more lower-income students” argument is entirely at odds with the “don’t be the (relatively) poor person at Langley” argument. If Langley is so miserable for those who are merely middle class, who exactly are you benefiting by gerrymandering economic diversity?

Gee, you might almost think there are multiple posters on the thread.

In any case, the Langley parents are pretty good at quickly suggesting that, sadly, there are insurmountable barriers to greater diversity at Langley while claiming that, of course, they’d be welcoming if only there were a way to overcome them. Talk about cognitive dissonance…

DP. There actually are multiple posters on this thread. Not sure what you're suggesting. We're all still waiting on the edge of our seats for you to tell us which areas should be bused to Langley - you know, high FARMs neighborhoods. Please enlighten us because you clearly have all the answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Perhaps our Board of Supervisors, which is so deeply committed to "One Fairfax," should prioritize the construction of affordable housing within Langley's current boundaries, especially the area closest to Great Falls Village. That's the most walkable part of Great Falls, and bus service could run from GFV to Metro, so it might well make sense to incentivize developers to build affordable housing there like the county is doing at this site in Tysons in the Marshall HS district:

https://www.insidenova.com/news/fairfax/fairfax-supervisors-ok-33m-in-funding-for-tysons-affordable-housing-effort/article_5410b3f8-8387-11ec-8517-7724a8f77bbc.html

The problem with these ideas is that they ignore reality. Two obvious issues:

1. Where would you build this level housing? There is no available land near Great Falls Village.

2. Even if there were land (and the zoning could be changed), there is no sewer service and you aren’t building higher density housing on septic (and certainly not lower-cost housing).

Where there's a will, there's a way. If it needs to be in the part of Great Falls that isn't on septic, so be it.

DP. As the PP stated, you are ignoring reality. This will never happen - but I think you know that. Great Falls is an historic, low-density, semi-rural area and the vast majority of neighborhoods are on septic. There will never be high density housing built there.

Many areas in NoVa are historic and were once low-density and semi-rural. Get over yourself.

Really? Which areas are those? And are they on septic or sewer? We'll wait.

[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:Those are two very different communities and your housing budget would place you in very different social places - you’d be rich at Chantilly and poor at Langley. What are your other priorities?

You would not be poor at Langley. You’d be average.

- Langley mom

In 2022, a $1.1-1.2M housing budget means you're below-average economically in the Langley HS district.

But someone has to be, as there's always a distribution. The Langley district is spread out and I don't think people are spending much time keeping tabs on who lives in the more affordable areas, which in Langley's case means (1) western Great Falls near Loudoun, (2) the Vienna neighborhoods off Route 7, and (3) the Kings Manor townhouses in McLean. Teaching your kids they can't always have everything some other kid has is a valuable lesson.

DP. You are correct that no one who actually goes to Langley thinks about or talks about the wealth of their peers. Curiously, that seems to be the sole purview of people whose kids go to school elsewhere.

How fantastic that OP has the benefit of the views of some random Langley mom who constantly pretends she knows what everyone in her pyramid thinks or says.

If I were the OP (who, btw, is probably a troll), I'd much prefer hearing from people with actual experience with said schools, rather than those who constantly make up absurd claims because they know nothing about it.

Personally I’d prefer hearing from someone humble enough to only speak for themselves and who wasn’t pushing some candy-coated narrative. Give us the good and the bad if you want to be taken seriously.

Plenty of us have done just that. It's the good that you don't want to hear - you can't stand hearing the good, in fact. We've pointed out that many of us are indeed middle class, live in small homes, drive minivans, etc. We simply don't have this weird inferiority complex that some of you so clearly have. Is there wealth in this area? Of course. There are also neighborhoods of modest homes and far less wealthy people. No one cares. No one but you, that is.

Nobody actually cares about your middle-class or wealthy lifestyle. The only thing we care about relevant to Langley is how the School Board continues to misuse the space available in the Langley pyramid for relieving overcrowding and concentration of FARMs children in surrounding areas.

I realize that I am beating a dead horse, but where are these magical people who can be moved into Langley? As a PP noted, the communites abutting's Langley boundaries are also primarily upper middle class and above. The only way to materially change Langley's current economic diversity is to draw an incredibly awkward boundary map, which is the same thing that a certain group of people complain about with regard to Langley's boundary extending to the Loudoun border. In fact, it's even more awkward because you'd literally need to have kids bypassing closer schools -- on the same route -- to get them to Langley. Anyone trying to have it both ways is just trying to pick a fight.

+ a million
The people who constantly grouse about this simply won't admit that what they're advocating for is social engineering. Plain and simple.

No dog in this fight but get serious. There isn't a better example of "social engineering" to be found in FCPS that making sure Langley has no poors.

Yup. This is a well known fact. And precisely the reason my kid will attend MHS although he could have transferred to Langley (for language). Place your kids in a decent school with values that align with yours, in my opinion.

That’s nice. Still waiting on those examples of magical FARMs kids who could be reassigned to Langley. Crickets.

I already addressed this:
"Boundaries are already incredibly awkward in the majority of pyramids, except that they've existed in this way for decades so they seem normal to everyone. It's also not awkward for students to bypass closer schools, that currently happens across the entire county near the borders of each boundary. People who live along the edges are almost certainly closer to another school than the one they are assigned to."

So there, a simple re-drawing of boundaries could put any number of FARMs students at Langley, just look at the Herndon area. Again, their proximity to HHS is irrelevant because we already established an understanding that it is completely normal for kids to live much closer to other schools yet are assigned to another. Look at Hayfield and Woodson boundaries for goodness' sake.

Just to confirm, then: you have no problem with all of Great Falls going to Langley (which must be the case if you are advocating for more of Herndon to go to Langley).

Can’t wait to see PP try and squirm out of that one!

Huh? It's fine if all of GF goes to Langley, there's still space for Langley to absorb a low-income apartment complex or two. All I am advocating for is that every FCPS high school take on some low-income apartments to distribute poverty. I don't understand why that is met with such contention. I mean, I do understand why Langley parents would feel that way, but I don't understand how you think it's actually defensible to fight against poor kids enrolling in a public school.

There is so much cognitive dissonance in this thread.

I don’t think many Langley parents would care if there were more lower-income students. I certainly can’t imagine that any of our neighbors would care. That argument is a straw man. But it’s also a fact that Langley’s geography makes adding meaningful economic diversity very difficult.

But the whole “add more lower-income students” argument is entirely at odds with the “don’t be the (relatively) poor person at Langley” argument. If Langley is so miserable for those who are merely middle class, who exactly are you benefiting by gerrymandering economic diversity?

Gee, you might almost think there are multiple posters on the thread.

In any case, the Langley parents are pretty good at quickly suggesting that, sadly, there are insurmountable barriers to greater diversity at Langley while claiming that, of course, they’d be welcoming if only there were a way to overcome them. Talk about cognitive dissonance…

I followed the most recent boundary change where they were going to possibly move all of Spring Hill to Langley since it was a split feeder. I’m not sure when they changed it at the end. I do think they should have moved some of the Tyson’s apartments to Langley. However, those apts are not cheap. You can’t afford a $5000 per month apt if you are low income. Still not sure where these low income people would come from.

[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:Those are two very different communities and your housing budget would place you in very different social places - you’d be rich at Chantilly and poor at Langley. What are your other priorities?

You would not be poor at Langley. You’d be average.

- Langley mom

In 2022, a $1.1-1.2M housing budget means you're below-average economically in the Langley HS district.

But someone has to be, as there's always a distribution. The Langley district is spread out and I don't think people are spending much time keeping tabs on who lives in the more affordable areas, which in Langley's case means (1) western Great Falls near Loudoun, (2) the Vienna neighborhoods off Route 7, and (3) the Kings Manor townhouses in McLean. Teaching your kids they can't always have everything some other kid has is a valuable lesson.

All kids can go to public school.

DP. You are correct that no one who actually goes to Langley thinks about or talks about the wealth of their peers. Curiously, that seems to be the sole purview of people whose kids go to school elsewhere.

How fantastic that OP has the benefit of the views of some random Langley mom who constantly pretends she knows what everyone in her pyramid thinks or says.

If I were the OP (who, btw, is probably a troll), I'd much prefer hearing from people with actual experience with said schools, rather than those who constantly make up absurd claims because they know nothing about it.

Personally I’d prefer hearing from someone humble enough to only speak for themselves and who wasn’t pushing some candy-coated narrative. Give us the good and the bad if you want to be taken seriously.

Plenty of us have done just that. It's the good that you don't want to hear - you can't stand hearing the good, in fact. We've pointed out that many of us are indeed middle class, live in small homes, drive minivans, etc. We simply don't have this weird inferiority complex that some of you so clearly have. Is there wealth in this area? Of course. There are also neighborhoods of modest homes and far less wealthy people. No one cares. No one but you, that is.

Nobody actually cares about your middle-class or wealthy lifestyle. The only thing we care about relevant to Langley is how the School Board continues to misuse the space available in the Langley pyramid for relieving overcrowding and concentration of FARMs children in surrounding areas.

I realize that I am beating a dead horse, but where are these magical people who can be moved into Langley? As a PP noted, the communites abutting's Langley boundaries are also primarily upper middle class and above. The only way to materially change Langley's current economic diversity is to draw an incredibly awkward boundary map, which is the same thing that a certain group of people complain about with regard to Langley's boundary extending to the Loudoun border. In fact, it's even more awkward because you'd literally need to have kids bypassing closer schools -- on the same route -- to get them to Langley. Anyone trying to have it both ways is just trying to pick a fight.

+ a million
The people who constantly grouse about this simply won't admit that what they're advocating for is social engineering. Plain and simple.

No dog in this fight but get serious. There isn't a better example of "social engineering" to be found in FCPS that making sure Langley has no poors.

Yup. This is a well known fact. And precisely the reason my kid will attend MHS although he could have transferred to Langley (for language). Place your kids in a decent school with values that align with yours, in my opinion.

That’s nice. Still waiting on those examples of magical FARMs kids who could be reassigned to Langley. Crickets.

I already addressed this:
"Boundaries are already incredibly awkward in the majority of pyramids, except that they've existed in this way for decades so they seem normal to everyone. It's also not awkward for students to bypass closer schools, that currently happens across the entire county near the borders of each boundary. People who live along the edges are almost certainly closer to another school than the one they are assigned to."

So there, a simple re-drawing of boundaries could put any number of FARMs students at Langley, just look at the Herndon area. Again, their proximity to HHS is irrelevant because we already established an understanding that it is completely normal for kids to live much closer to other schools yet are assigned to another. Look at Hayfield and Woodson boundaries for goodness' sake.

Just to confirm, then: you have no problem with all of Great Falls going to Langley (which must be the case if you are advocating for more of Herndon to go to Langley).

Can’t wait to see PP try and squirm out of that one!

Huh? It's fine if all of GF goes to Langley, there's still space for Langley to absorb a low-income apartment complex or two. All I am advocating for is that every FCPS high school take on some low-income apartments to distribute poverty. I don't understand why that is met with such contention. I mean, I do understand why Langley parents would feel that way, but I don't understand how you think it's actually defensible to fight against poor kids enrolling in a public school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Perhaps our Board of Supervisors, which is so deeply committed to "One Fairfax," should prioritize the construction of affordable housing within Langley's current boundaries, especially the area closest to Great Falls Village. That's the most walkable part of Great Falls, and bus service could run from GFV to Metro, so it might well make sense to incentivize developers to build affordable housing there like the county is doing at this site in Tysons in the Marshall HS district:

https://www.insidenova.com/news/fairfax/fairfax-supervisors-ok-33m-in-funding-for-tysons-affordable-housing-effort/article_5410b3f8-8387-11ec-8517-7724a8f77bbc.html

The problem with these ideas is that they ignore reality. Two obvious issues:

1. Where would you build this level housing? There is no available land near Great Falls Village.

2. Even if there were land (and the zoning could be changed), there is no sewer service and you aren’t building higher density housing on septic (and certainly not lower-cost housing).

Where there's a will, there's a way. If it needs to be in the part of Great Falls that isn't on septic, so be it.

DP. As the PP stated, you are ignoring reality. This will never happen - but I think you know that. Great Falls is an historic, low-density, semi-rural area and the vast majority of neighborhoods are on septic. There will never be high density housing built there.

Many areas in NoVa are historic and were once low-density and semi-rural. Get over yourself.

No.

We are going to stay low density and semi rural.

Every bit of the county does not have to be packed with high rises, townhomes and single family homes on tiny little lots.
Every place does not have to be every other place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those are two very different communities and your housing budget would place you in very different social places - you’d be rich at Chantilly and poor at Langley. What are your other priorities?

I hear you. May be that’s the reason I want to move to GF.
We are an Asian couple and part of me wants to transition to that social strata.

DH is afraid to make that transition. I want kids to have that taste of a different social circle. My personal belief is that you become what group you are part of. We combined make around 275K and I am sure we would be in lower spectrum at Langley.

Please enlighten or correct me if my way of thinking is wrong.
Is there a different lens I should be looking through as well?

We make what you do and I would not want to spend that much money on a mortgage. We prefer to be saving for retirement, college, and other activities. Intentionally moving into a rich school knowing that you are likely to be at the top end of your budget means knowing that your kids are not going to have what their peers have. They are not likely to travel to the places their peers travel to or have the same clothes or shoes or cars. They are going to have different opportunities for colleges.

Do you really think that it is important enough to be surrounded by a different social strata that you are willing to deal with the downsides of hearing your kids talk about the trips they can't take and things they can't do that their peers are doing?

Personally, and it is 100% based on your own priorities, I would buy a house that I can more easily afford and where my kids don't feel deprived based on their classmates experiences. But that is me. I also don't care about social circles or buy into pressuring kids so they can go to schools with the elite for the networks. Different mind sets.

Agree. We make quite a bit more than you do, and I would never subject my kids to being the “poor” kids in a place like Langley. This will not help them.

You people are so insecure. Good grief. We're one of many Langley families who fall in the "average" range for the area. No one thinks or talks about this nonsense - except, apparently, those whose kids go to school elsewhere. Really bizarre.

+1. We're on the lower end of income for the Langley area and don't notice this stuff. Yes, some of the kids have bigger houses than we do, but my kids aren't complaining about it. Most of the wealthiest families go to private school anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Perhaps our Board of Supervisors, which is so deeply committed to "One Fairfax," should prioritize the construction of affordable housing within Langley's current boundaries, especially the area closest to Great Falls Village. That's the most walkable part of Great Falls, and bus service could run from GFV to Metro, so it might well make sense to incentivize developers to build affordable housing there like the county is doing at this site in Tysons in the Marshall HS district:

https://www.insidenova.com/news/fairfax/fairfax-supervisors-ok-33m-in-funding-for-tysons-affordable-housing-effort/article_5410b3f8-8387-11ec-8517-7724a8f77bbc.html

The problem with these ideas is that they ignore reality. Two obvious issues:

1. Where would you build this level housing? There is no available land near Great Falls Village.

2. Even if there were land (and the zoning could be changed), there is no sewer service and you aren’t building higher density housing on septic (and certainly not lower-cost housing).

Where there's a will, there's a way. If it needs to be in the part of Great Falls that isn't on septic, so be it.

DP. As the PP stated, you are ignoring reality. This will never happen - but I think you know that. Great Falls is an historic, low-density, semi-rural area and the vast majority of neighborhoods are on septic. There will never be high density housing built there.

Many areas in NoVa are historic and were once low-density and semi-rural. Get over yourself.

No.

We are going to stay low density and semi rural.

Every bit of the county does not have to be packed with high rises, townhomes and single family homes on tiny little lots.
Every place does not have to be every other place.

Sounds like a defense ripped right out of the segregation playbook.

[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:Those are two very different communities and your housing budget would place you in very different social places - you’d be rich at Chantilly and poor at Langley. What are your other priorities?

You would not be poor at Langley. You’d be average.

- Langley mom

In 2022, a $1.1-1.2M housing budget means you're below-average economically in the Langley HS district.

But someone has to be, as there's always a distribution. The Langley district is spread out and I don't think people are spending much time keeping tabs on who lives in the more affordable areas, which in Langley's case means (1) western Great Falls near Loudoun, (2) the Vienna neighborhoods off Route 7, and (3) the Kings Manor townhouses in McLean. Teaching your kids they can't always have everything some other kid has is a valuable lesson.

DP. You are correct that no one who actually goes to Langley thinks about or talks about the wealth of their peers. Curiously, that seems to be the sole purview of people whose kids go to school elsewhere.

How fantastic that OP has the benefit of the views of some random Langley mom who constantly pretends she knows what everyone in her pyramid thinks or says.

If I were the OP (who, btw, is probably a troll), I'd much prefer hearing from people with actual experience with said schools, rather than those who constantly make up absurd claims because they know nothing about it.

Personally I’d prefer hearing from someone humble enough to only speak for themselves and who wasn’t pushing some candy-coated narrative. Give us the good and the bad if you want to be taken seriously.

Plenty of us have done just that. It's the good that you don't want to hear - you can't stand hearing the good, in fact. We've pointed out that many of us are indeed middle class, live in small homes, drive minivans, etc. We simply don't have this weird inferiority complex that some of you so clearly have. Is there wealth in this area? Of course. There are also neighborhoods of modest homes and far less wealthy people. No one cares. No one but you, that is.

Nobody actually cares about your middle-class or wealthy lifestyle. The only thing we care about relevant to Langley is how the School Board continues to misuse the space available in the Langley pyramid for relieving overcrowding and concentration of FARMs children in surrounding areas.

I realize that I am beating a dead horse, but where are these magical people who can be moved into Langley? As a PP noted, the communites abutting's Langley boundaries are also primarily upper middle class and above. The only way to materially change Langley's current economic diversity is to draw an incredibly awkward boundary map, which is the same thing that a certain group of people complain about with regard to Langley's boundary extending to the Loudoun border. In fact, it's even more awkward because you'd literally need to have kids bypassing closer schools -- on the same route -- to get them to Langley. Anyone trying to have it both ways is just trying to pick a fight.

+ a million
The people who constantly grouse about this simply won't admit that what they're advocating for is social engineering. Plain and simple.

No dog in this fight but get serious. There isn't a better example of "social engineering" to be found in FCPS that making sure Langley has no poors.

Yup. This is a well known fact. And precisely the reason my kid will attend MHS although he could have transferred to Langley (for language). Place your kids in a decent school with values that align with yours, in my opinion.

That’s nice. Still waiting on those examples of magical FARMs kids who could be reassigned to Langley. Crickets.

I already addressed this:
"Boundaries are already incredibly awkward in the majority of pyramids, except that they've existed in this way for decades so they seem normal to everyone. It's also not awkward for students to bypass closer schools, that currently happens across the entire county near the borders of each boundary. People who live along the edges are almost certainly closer to another school than the one they are assigned to."

So there, a simple re-drawing of boundaries could put any number of FARMs students at Langley, just look at the Herndon area. Again, their proximity to HHS is irrelevant because we already established an understanding that it is completely normal for kids to live much closer to other schools yet are assigned to another. Look at Hayfield and Woodson boundaries for goodness' sake.

Just to confirm, then: you have no problem with all of Great Falls going to Langley (which must be the case if you are advocating for more of Herndon to go to Langley).

Can’t wait to see PP try and squirm out of that one!

Huh? It's fine if all of GF goes to Langley, there's still space for Langley to absorb a low-income apartment complex or two. All I am advocating for is that every FCPS high school take on some low-income apartments to distribute poverty. I don't understand why that is met with such contention. I mean, I do understand why Langley parents would feel that way, but I don't understand how you think it's actually defensible to fight against poor kids enrolling in a public school.

There is so much cognitive dissonance in this thread.

I don’t think many Langley parents would care if there were more lower-income students. I certainly can’t imagine that any of our neighbors would care. That argument is a straw man. But it’s also a fact that Langley’s geography makes adding meaningful economic diversity very difficult.

But the whole “add more lower-income students” argument is entirely at odds with the “don’t be the (relatively) poor person at Langley” argument. If Langley is so miserable for those who are merely middle class, who exactly are you benefiting by gerrymandering economic diversity?

Gee, you might almost think there are multiple posters on the thread.

In any case, the Langley parents are pretty good at quickly suggesting that, sadly, there are insurmountable barriers to greater diversity at Langley while claiming that, of course, they’d be welcoming if only there were a way to overcome them. Talk about cognitive dissonance…

I followed the most recent boundary change where they were going to possibly move all of Spring Hill to Langley since it was a split feeder. I’m not sure when they changed it at the end. I do think they should have moved some of the Tyson’s apartments to Langley. However, those apts are not cheap. You can’t afford a $5000 per month apt if you are low income. Still not sure where these low income people would come from.

Exactly. So ironic that the PP is talking about "cognitive dissonance." She would clearly know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Perhaps our Board of Supervisors, which is so deeply committed to "One Fairfax," should prioritize the construction of affordable housing within Langley's current boundaries, especially the area closest to Great Falls Village. That's the most walkable part of Great Falls, and bus service could run from GFV to Metro, so it might well make sense to incentivize developers to build affordable housing there like the county is doing at this site in Tysons in the Marshall HS district:

https://www.insidenova.com/news/fairfax/fairfax-supervisors-ok-33m-in-funding-for-tysons-affordable-housing-effort/article_5410b3f8-8387-11ec-8517-7724a8f77bbc.html

The problem with these ideas is that they ignore reality. Two obvious issues:

1. Where would you build this level housing? There is no available land near Great Falls Village.

2. Even if there were land (and the zoning could be changed), there is no sewer service and you aren’t building higher density housing on septic (and certainly not lower-cost housing).

Where there's a will, there's a way. If it needs to be in the part of Great Falls that isn't on septic, so be it.

DP. As the PP stated, you are ignoring reality. This will never happen - but I think you know that. Great Falls is an historic, low-density, semi-rural area and the vast majority of neighborhoods are on septic. There will never be high density housing built there.

Many areas in NoVa are historic and were once low-density and semi-rural. Get over yourself.

No.

We are going to stay low density and semi rural.

Every bit of the county does not have to be packed with high rises, townhomes and single family homes on tiny little lots.
Every place does not have to be every other place.

Sounds like a defense ripped right out of the segregation playbook.

Hoo boy, so predictable. I'm a DP, but the PP is correct. There's a reason GF has stayed semi-rural and low-density. Homeowners have voted to do without sewer service and remain on septic. Though you're certainly welcome to continue throwing your tantrums and demanding sewer come to GF.

[Anonymous]

Fairfax county high schools are all diverse,

Every single one

People just like to complain

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fairfax county high schools are all diverse,

Every single one

People just like to complain

Separate but equal!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fairfax county high schools are all diverse,

Every single one

People just like to complain

I used to live in Alexandria and now live in McLean. Both schools are incredibly diverse, just in different ways. Our school in Alexandria had a large Spanish speaking population and our McLean school has more Asians and Middle Eastern students.