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.
Who says I haven’t had the conversations? Sometimes you can be really dense.
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.
Who says I haven’t had the conversations? Sometimes you can be really dense.
Sorry - didn’t realize buyers in the Langley pyramid are as clueless as you’re making them out to be.
This is a bit of an aside but how will Pimmit Hills residents feel if they end up sending the part of Pimmit Hills that feeds into Westgate to McLean and sending all of Lemon Road, including the part of PH that feeds to LR, at Marshall?
That seems like a real possibility to me, especially if they move the current McLean attendance islands to Langley (Tysons) and Falls Church (Timber Lane). It would eliminate the split feeders at Westgate and Lemon Road, but it would also break up Pimmit Hills, all of which now feeds into GCM.
Anonymous wrote:This is a bit of an aside but how will Pimmit Hills residents feel if they end up sending the part of Pimmit Hills that feeds into Westgate to McLean and sending all of Lemon Road, including the part of PH that feeds to LR, at Marshall?
That seems like a real possibility to me, especially if they move the current McLean attendance islands to Langley (Tysons) and Falls Church (Timber Lane). It would eliminate the split feeders at Westgate and Lemon Road, but it would also break up Pimmit Hills, all of which now feeds into GCM.
I think Westgate and Lemon Road may remain split feeders because of that. They can’t serve PH in a single ES, and the boundaries for Westgate are in both the Marshall and McLean walk zones (the newest town houses have a view of Marshall from across Rt 7.) I think they may send more of the 22102 apartments from Westgate to McLean, but where Pimmit Hills ends up will be a real flip of the coin. I tend to think they’ll keep it all at Marshall, especially if they send a lot of the SFH neighborhoods from their western border off to Madison.
Anonymous wrote:This is a bit of an aside but how will Pimmit Hills residents feel if they end up sending the part of Pimmit Hills that feeds into Westgate to McLean and sending all of Lemon Road, including the part of PH that feeds to LR, at Marshall?
That seems like a real possibility to me, especially if they move the current McLean attendance islands to Langley (Tysons) and Falls Church (Timber Lane). It would eliminate the split feeders at Westgate and Lemon Road, but it would also break up Pimmit Hills, all of which now feeds into GCM.
They would need to move kids from one part of Mclean out of MHS before moving other kids in. There is no way MHS can fit MORE kids at its current "over" capacity.
Anonymous wrote:This is a bit of an aside but how will Pimmit Hills residents feel if they end up sending the part of Pimmit Hills that feeds into Westgate to McLean and sending all of Lemon Road, including the part of PH that feeds to LR, at Marshall?
That seems like a real possibility to me, especially if they move the current McLean attendance islands to Langley (Tysons) and Falls Church (Timber Lane). It would eliminate the split feeders at Westgate and Lemon Road, but it would also break up Pimmit Hills, all of which now feeds into GCM.
They would need to move kids from one part of Mclean out of MHS before moving other kids in. There is no way MHS can fit MORE kids at its current "over" capacity.
The question was premised on moving kids out of the current split feeders at Spring Hill (McLean kids to Langley), Timber Lane (McLean kids to Falls Church), and Lemon Road (McLean kids to Marshall), but then moving the Marshall kids at Westgate to McLean, so that the split feeders at all four schools are eliminated. On a net basis, that is a further reduction in McLean's enrollment, but the flip side is that it would divide Pimmit Hills, which now feeds entirely to Marshall, between Marshall and McLean.
If they move the Spring Hill and Timber Lane attendance islands out of McLean, almost all the remaining economic diversity at McLean would come from Westgate, so it struck me they might assign more of Westgate to McLean to counter moving the islands to Langley and Falls Church. But I think Pimmit Hills has always gone to one high school, whether it was McLean in the late 50s and early 60s and Marshall ever since the mid-60s.
Anonymous wrote:This is a bit of an aside but how will Pimmit Hills residents feel if they end up sending the part of Pimmit Hills that feeds into Westgate to McLean and sending all of Lemon Road, including the part of PH that feeds to LR, at Marshall?
That seems like a real possibility to me, especially if they move the current McLean attendance islands to Langley (Tysons) and Falls Church (Timber Lane). It would eliminate the split feeders at Westgate and Lemon Road, but it would also break up Pimmit Hills, all of which now feeds into GCM.
They would need to move kids from one part of Mclean out of MHS before moving other kids in. There is no way MHS can fit MORE kids at its current "over" capacity.
The question was premised on moving kids out of the current split feeders at Spring Hill (McLean kids to Langley), Timber Lane (McLean kids to Falls Church), and Lemon Road (McLean kids to Marshall), but then moving the Marshall kids at Westgate to McLean, so that the split feeders at all four schools are eliminated. On a net basis, that is a further reduction in McLean's enrollment, but the flip side is that it would divide Pimmit Hills, which now feeds entirely to Marshall, between Marshall and McLean.
If they move the Spring Hill and Timber Lane attendance islands out of McLean, almost all the remaining economic diversity at McLean would come from Westgate, so it struck me they might assign more of Westgate to McLean to counter moving the islands to Langley and Falls Church. But I think Pimmit Hills has always gone to one high school, whether it was McLean in the late 50s and early 60s and Marshall ever since the mid-60s.
Westgate was recently expanded to 847 students but only has a program capacity of 677 and is currently around 600 students. They could potentially take all of Pimmit Hills, especially if they reopen the Pimmit Hills center in the next 10 years, which due to its proximity to Westgate, would probably be an upper elementary.
Still, I think they’ll try to keep Pimmit Hills at GCM to balance more single family neighborhoods with all the condos and apartments.
Anonymous wrote:This is a bit of an aside but how will Pimmit Hills residents feel if they end up sending the part of Pimmit Hills that feeds into Westgate to McLean and sending all of Lemon Road, including the part of PH that feeds to LR, at Marshall?
That seems like a real possibility to me, especially if they move the current McLean attendance islands to Langley (Tysons) and Falls Church (Timber Lane). It would eliminate the split feeders at Westgate and Lemon Road, but it would also break up Pimmit Hills, all of which now feeds into GCM.
They would need to move kids from one part of Mclean out of MHS before moving other kids in. There is no way MHS can fit MORE kids at its current "over" capacity.
The question was premised on moving kids out of the current split feeders at Spring Hill (McLean kids to Langley), Timber Lane (McLean kids to Falls Church), and Lemon Road (McLean kids to Marshall), but then moving the Marshall kids at Westgate to McLean, so that the split feeders at all four schools are eliminated. On a net basis, that is a further reduction in McLean's enrollment, but the flip side is that it would divide Pimmit Hills, which now feeds entirely to Marshall, between Marshall and McLean.
If they move the Spring Hill and Timber Lane attendance islands out of McLean, almost all the remaining economic diversity at McLean would come from Westgate, so it struck me they might assign more of Westgate to McLean to counter moving the islands to Langley and Falls Church. But I think Pimmit Hills has always gone to one high school, whether it was McLean in the late 50s and early 60s and Marshall ever since the mid-60s.
Westgate was recently expanded to 847 students but only has a program capacity of 677 and is currently around 600 students. They could potentially take all of Pimmit Hills, especially if they reopen the Pimmit Hills center in the next 10 years, which due to its proximity to Westgate, would probably be an upper elementary.
Still, I think they’ll try to keep Pimmit Hills at GCM to balance more single family neighborhoods with all the condos and apartments.
The balancing argument is so lame. Five years from now, families will re-sort and we’ll be right back in this spot.
They will do maximum damage with the equity boundary adjustments
Forum Index
»
Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}