Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We actually agree. And have tried to use other logical arguments and our BRAC reps told us FCPS only cares about transportation costs etc. so focus on those. We have written several comments on the maps with other arguments on how and why to keep our neighborhood together

There is a very good chance that the school board views your "neighborhood" as the hundreds of your Sangster friends, neighbors and classmates that you would transition to Lake Braddock with, and not the Irving and West Springfield kids that you don't even meet until 7th grade at Irving when you change pyramids to Irving in 7th grade with a couple dozen other Sangster students.

Except due to AAP, Sangster sends more than just this in boundary pocket to Irving. They know way more than a dozen students, due to the many AAP who come to sangster from HVES and OHES.

But those are only AAP kids.

The non AAP kids wouldn't really know many of them because they don't have classes together.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they were going to redo boundaries, they should have started from scratch. Example - given travel distance, ALL of Sangster should go to WSHS, instead of the small attendance island being shifted to Braddock.
Sangster kids are traveling up to half hour to get to Braddock, whereas WSHS is much closer.

At whose expense? Almost ALL of WSHS's boundary is within a 2 mile radius of the school. That's why no one feels they should be the ones to go.

Stop transfers in, include Sangster in WSHS, adjust Lake braddock, send Daventry back to Lewis....

Sangster is farther from WSHS than Daventry.

Sangster is 4 to 7 miles from WSHS.

Most of the other WSHS neighborhoods are 2.5 miles or less to WSHS,

Ok, now calculate how far Sangster is fm Braddock.

5.5 miles from LB

4.2 miles from WS

Less than a 1.5 mile difference.

Alright. So as I said, WS is closer to Sangster.

It all depends what freaking address you use. That area in quite long. Just stop.

There are only around 3 Sangster streets that are closer to WSHS than LBSS.

I don't understand how the Sangster families can't see that trying to use transportation as their main argument is a losing argument. All the facts work against them.

They have one or two better arguments than transportation and distance.

What are their better arguments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We actually agree. And have tried to use other logical arguments and our BRAC reps told us FCPS only cares about transportation costs etc. so focus on those. We have written several comments on the maps with other arguments on how and why to keep our neighborhood together

There is a very good chance that the school board views your "neighborhood" as the hundreds of your Sangster friends, neighbors and classmates that you would transition to Lake Braddock with, and not the Irving and West Springfield kids that you don't even meet until 7th grade at Irving when you change pyramids to Irving in 7th grade with a couple dozen other Sangster students.

Except due to AAP, Sangster sends more than just this in boundary pocket to Irving. They know way more than a dozen students, due to the many AAP who come to sangster from HVES and OHES.

But those are only AAP kids.

The non AAP kids wouldn't really know many of them because they don't have classes together.

Wait, aren’t they getting rid of AAP center schools for middle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We actually agree. And have tried to use other logical arguments and our BRAC reps told us FCPS only cares about transportation costs etc. so focus on those. We have written several comments on the maps with other arguments on how and why to keep our neighborhood together

There is a very good chance that the school board views your "neighborhood" as the hundreds of your Sangster friends, neighbors and classmates that you would transition to Lake Braddock with, and not the Irving and West Springfield kids that you don't even meet until 7th grade at Irving when you change pyramids to Irving in 7th grade with a couple dozen other Sangster students.

Except due to AAP, Sangster sends more than just this in boundary pocket to Irving. They know way more than a dozen students, due to the many AAP who come to sangster from HVES and OHES.

But those are only AAP kids.

The non AAP kids wouldn't really know many of them because they don't have classes together.

Wait, aren’t they getting rid of AAP center schools for middle?

Not for several years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

[Anonymous]

Some people didn't believe when I predicted that Westfield would lose 1,000 students based on enrollment numbers at Floris, McNair, and Coates.

Scenarios A and B today confirm this projection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.

Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.


Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again. The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities. Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school. This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been. I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail. Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.


Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again. The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities. Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school. This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been. I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail. Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some people didn't believe when I predicted that Westfield would lose 1,000 students based on enrollment numbers at Floris, McNair, and Coates.

Scenarios A and B today confirm this projection.

Option A and B have Westfield net -303, while C and D have them net -238. They'll still be utilizing their trailers at that rate. Plus, it looks like they are losing the highest FARMS areas to the new school so seems like they'll come out ahead academically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.


Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again. The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities. Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school. This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been. I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail. Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community.

+1 more

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.


Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again. The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities. Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school. This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been. I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail. Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community.

Sorry, but it is not a faulty argument

They followed the guidelines.

Other pyramuds did not, but that is not the fsult of the pyramid reps that did what they were tasked to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.


Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again. The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities. Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school. This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been. I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail. Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community.

If you surveyed all thr WSHS parents, you would most likely find that the vast majority view Sangster to Lake Braddock as the best possible option for WSHS, since Lake Braddock is such a fantastic school with so much overlap with the WSHS community. Sangster is also Lake Braddock's biggest feeder school, with those Sangster island 7th graders knowing far more Lake Braddock kids than Irving kids, just from their neighbors and classmates.

Of all of the rezoning options of moving kids out of WSHS, Sangster island to Lake Braddock make the most sense and provides the most continuity, best neighborhood and community connection, and the most consistent school experience. Any other rezoning out option, including the Keene Mill island off Huntsman to White Oaks and Lake Braddock, is far more disruptive to the students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.


Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again. The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities. Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school. This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been. I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail. Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community.

If you surveyed all thr WSHS parents, you would most likely find that the vast majority view Sangster to Lake Braddock as the best possible option for WSHS, since Lake Braddock is such a fantastic school with so much overlap with the WSHS community. Sangster is also Lake Braddock's biggest feeder school, with those Sangster island 7th graders knowing far more Lake Braddock kids than Irving kids, just from their neighbors and classmates.

Of all of the rezoning options of moving kids out of WSHS, Sangster island to Lake Braddock make the most sense and provides the most continuity, best neighborhood and community connection, and the most consistent school experience. Any other rezoning out option, including the Keene Mill island off Huntsman to White Oaks and Lake Braddock, is far more disruptive to the students.

Sorry, complete hearsay. I have actually surveyed almost all the parents at Sangster zoned for WS and the vast, vast majority want to stay within their West Springfield Community. We explained and pleaded with our BRAC reps and the board that we preferred the split...its our community and neighbors. We were told that they were advocating for us. We had board members tell us to our faces that they agreed with us.
We've attended almost every meeting, followed all feedback channels. Again, this move will make Lake Braddock overpopulated, does not help Lewis, is unwelcomed from the neighborhood, and will do little to 'fix' overpopulation at WS in the long run. Many of my LB parent friends feel it's over crowded enough. If you don't live here, if this isn't your neighborhood...kindly don't speak for others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sangster should stop fighting rezoning and just focus on guaranteeing garndfathering for current Irving enrolled students to continue to WSHS.

6th and younger from that neighborhood should just attend LB with all of their friends and classmates from Sangster.

Agreed. Other WSHS neighborhoods are looking at moving to lower performing schools. These are champagne problems for Sangster neighborhoods who could move from one great HS to another great HS. They’d be wise to focus on grandfathering.

Moving this pocket causes Lake Braddock to be overcapacity 102-103%, and does nothing to help Lewis. It also won't do anything to help WS overcrowding in the long run if you move them out and Rolling Valley kids in. Region 4 Scenerio 4 does little to solve any long term problems, and ticks off a neighborhood who doesn't believe the split is an issue for their families and feels very connected to the WS community (because they are). BRAC and Thru let region 4 down.

I disagree.

The Springfield BRAC members did a great job following the BRAC instructions on focusing eliminating split feeders.

The Sangster neighborhood is getting moved to an equal or better school if you look at SAT scores, within their community and which they have equal or closer ties to than WSHS.

Of all the possible rezoning scenarios, the Springfield BRAC did the best possible outcome for WSHS and the Sangster neighborhood.

The Rolling Valley rezoning is Sandy Anderson's pet project, so you cannot blame the BRAC committee members for that one.


Even so, it did eliminate a split feeder. Every change in map 4 for WSHS eliminated the WSHS split feeders.

You can't get mad at the BRAC committee members for following their instructions to a T. You can't get mad at them for following instructions, just because other pyramid BRAC reps ignored the instructions. You can't get mad at them for Rolling Valley, that is Sandy Anderson's thing and one of the main reasons why this rezoning process started.

Be mad at the process and the school board. Don't be mad at the volunteer BRAC reps for following the process they were told to follow using the criteria they were given.

Uggg...there's that faulty split feeder argument again. The majority of split feeders in every other pyramid were not closed and parents across the county overwhelming did not see split feeders as an issue (including the families at Sangster). 'Fixing' Split feeders was ranked towards the bottom of the boundary survey and other region representatives actually represented their communities. Both the West Springfield reps were Hunter Valley parents and kept Hunt Valley at WS instead of moving it to an unpopulated school. This is less about Sangster and more about how mismanaged this whole process has been. I actual appreciate all the work the BRAC put into this, but they were always set up to fail. Region 4 Scenerio 4 is not the right one for WS or for the greater FCPS community.

If you surveyed all thr WSHS parents, you would most likely find that the vast majority view Sangster to Lake Braddock as the best possible option for WSHS, since Lake Braddock is such a fantastic school with so much overlap with the WSHS community. Sangster is also Lake Braddock's biggest feeder school, with those Sangster island 7th graders knowing far more Lake Braddock kids than Irving kids, just from their neighbors and classmates.

Of all of the rezoning options of moving kids out of WSHS, Sangster island to Lake Braddock make the most sense and provides the most continuity, best neighborhood and community connection, and the most consistent school experience. Any other rezoning out option, including the Keene Mill island off Huntsman to White Oaks and Lake Braddock, is far more disruptive to the students.

Sorry, complete hearsay. I have actually surveyed almost all the parents at Sangster zoned for WS and the vast, vast majority want to stay within their West Springfield Community. We explained and pleaded with our BRAC reps and the board that we preferred the split...its our community and neighbors. We were told that they were advocating for us. We had board members tell us to our faces that they agreed with us.
We've attended almost every meeting, followed all feedback channels. Again, this move will make Lake Braddock overpopulated, does not help Lewis, is unwelcomed from the neighborhood, and will do little to 'fix' overpopulation at WS in the long run. Many of my LB parent friends feel it's over crowded enough. If you don't live here, if this isn't your neighborhood...kindly don't speak for others.

Preach!!