FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Yes they do and Waples is happening.

[Anonymous]

I'd believe it if you said they were going to redraw the Waples boundary and put the Penderbrook families back in the Johnson/Fairfax pyramid like they used to be. That would make sense if they were trying to bring the AAP kids back to Waples for a local level 4 AAP. Moving the whole school doesn't make any sense at all though and would result in longer travel times for Waples zoned families to Fairfax vs Oakton, as well it would create a large attendance island farther west out of the Navy and Crossfield families that go to Oakton.
Repeating anything from the troll post is counterproductive, but this particular part of it is what sold me on the whole thing just being made up.

[Anonymous]

So it’s okay to move the Penderbrook kids because they don’t have an Oakton address. It is not just Penderbrook with Fairfax addresses. All the houses off of Fairfax Farms do too.

[Anonymous]

They can put mosby woods back to Fairfax too - they are right there!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes they do and Waples is happening.

Stop trying to make fetch happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So it’s okay to move the Penderbrook kids because they don’t have an Oakton address. It is not just Penderbrook with Fairfax addresses. All the houses off of Fairfax Farms do too.

The Post Office makes decisions differently than school districts. There are some houses in Arlington that have McLean addresses, some houses in McLean that have Arlington and Falls Church addresses too. When my grandparents retired in Virginia, their land was right on the NC line and enough though their house and land was in Virginia, they had an NC address. A school system should never base their school districts on zipcode.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They can put mosby woods back to Fairfax too - they are right there!

Why is Fairfax HS split the way it is? Why wouldn’t the western part of Woodson go to there and the large Fairfax island go further out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can put mosby woods back to Fairfax too - they are right there!

Why is Fairfax HS split the way it is? Why wouldn’t the western part of Woodson go to there and the large Fairfax island go further out?

This is one of the attendance islands Thru has identified in their analysis to BRAC. I’m sure that’s coming into consideration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They can put mosby woods back to Fairfax too - they are right there!

Why is Fairfax HS split the way it is? Why wouldn’t the western part of Woodson go to there and the large Fairfax island go further out?

This is one of the attendance islands Thru has identified in their analysis to BRAC. I’m sure that’s coming into consideration.

Why doesn’t Fairfax Villa attend Fairfax High?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw the FCPS email about the budget shortfall. It takes a lot of chutzpah to ask for families to advocate for more money when the SB is about to significantly and detrimentally unnecessarily move kids as part of the boundary review.

If they go through with the boundary changes, I look forward to annually advocating for as little money to go to FCPS as possible.

If they drop the whole boundary change nonsense then I’d consider advocating for more money.

So here's the situation as you propose:

FCPS will no longer operate your schools as, effectively, tax-payer funded private-like schools? Your response is to stop funding FCPS.
And if FCPS will allow you to continue attending your private-like schools? Let's make the taxpayers pay even more for your continued self-interest!

DP. Seems like you’re ignoring the fact that Karl Frisch wants to gouge county taxpayers by trying to blackmail them into spending over $85 million on his Dunn Loring ES boondoggle (otherwise other school projects get held up).

Between that and potential boundary changes that are largely unnecessary, it’s entirely reasonable for people to decide they can’t support additional funding for FCPS until there’s a change in direction.

+1
And the more I think about the bolded, the madder I get. Think of what that $85 million could do for FCPS. This SB is absurd.
DP

The money could have gone to a new ES built at Blake Lane park, which might be very needed in the future if the ATT redevelopment attracts a lot of families. Oakton ES is already overcrowded, and these kids will need a place to go to school. This is part of the reason Waples ES families are worried about the boundary rezoning process. ATT bringing in lots of new kids seems like it could set up dominoes that would result in existing, established communities getting disrupted and shuffled around.

But then Karl and his childless friends couldn’t have their dog park Won’t someone please think of the poor people with dogs and no kids. Wah wahhhh.

The bigots have arrived.

DP. Do you think people who don't have dogs should have a say in the design and upkeep of dog parks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So it’s okay to move the Penderbrook kids because they don’t have an Oakton address. It is not just Penderbrook with Fairfax addresses. All the houses off of Fairfax Farms do too.

Didn't mean to say it's okay to move Penderbrook, just that it would be more believable than moving the whole school zone for the reasons I mentioned. Personally I think Penderbrook should stay as using I66 as the boundary line seems logical from a "keep the community together" standpoint.

[Anonymous]

^ I meant 50 not 66 in the comment above. Got a little mixed up with where they intersect.

[Anonymous]

Kyle McDaniel is one of the chief architects of the equity boundary moves, right? It’s him and Sniveling Sandy Anderson.

Add the alleged ethical lapses of an alleged embezzler to the list of reasons to oppose boundary changes.

Ask yourself, how does McDaniel stand to gain from these moves? It’s never been about the kids.

[Anonymous]

How will boundary changes improve the quality of education at FCPS?

First question that should be asked. Has it been?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How will boundary changes improve the quality of education at FCPS?

First question that should be asked. Has it been?

Teacher here. We have kids in our boundary that have 2-3 ES that are much closer. Many of these kids are FRM and some parents don’t all have cars. If a kid misses bus or has a doctor appt, they usually do not come to school at all. If you look at chronic absenteeism, this group is a huge part of it. If they could go to schools closer this could help. One of them they could even walk to. Parents might be more involved if the school was closer as well.

Secondly, you literally have under enrolled buildings and buildings bursting at seams. This will help balance that out.

My main hope for the boundary adjustments are that the boundaries make sense. All kids should go to the school CLOSEST to them. AAP centers should also go away.