Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sounds like you’re happy to throw other WS neighborhoods under the bus.

What a strange and narrow-minded comment to make. These are simple facts. Scenerio 4 for Region 4 1.) Will make LB over capacity 2.) Moving RV children is taking children from underpopulated Lewis 3.) Split feeders are not an FCPS community priority 4.) The Sangster/Irving/West Springfield parents and families feel strongly tied to the WS community. None of this is 'throwing anyone else under a bus'. If anything, it feels like the Sangster WS neighborhood is being used as a bandaid that will not fix any larger problems. And it is making many feel uncomfortable because the move does not fit into a neat box so that other 'neighborhoods' can feel safe from being moved. We are all one FCPS together, and the moves in region four are not going to help the majority of students in the long run. I'm sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable.

Lake Braddock will actually not be over capacity, because coupled with the boundary change, the Irving students will no longer attend Lake Braddock for AAP.

The boundary map tool has it at 102% with changes. I'd send you the link but I'm sure you can figure it out.

That’s not over capacity by their definition. And we are now trusting those numbers? No more “the numbers are wrong”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the maps posted:

Scenario A:
1792 at KAA
-362 at Centreville, 0 in
-691 at Chantilly, 0 in
-436 at Oakton, 0 in
-1005 at Westfield, 702 in (net -303)

Scenario B:
1726 at KAA
-362 at Centreville, 0 in
-691 at Chantilly, 0 in
-370 at South Lakes, 0 in
-1005 at Westfield, 702 in (net -303)

Scenario C:
2142 at KAA
-362 at Centreville, 0 in
-698 at Chantilly, 0 in
-436 at Oakton, 0 in
-408 at South Lakes, 0 in
-940 at Westfield, 702 in (net -236)

Scenario D:
2068 at KAA
-362 at Centreville, 0 in
-698 at Chantilly, 0 in
-362 at Oakton, 0 in
-408 at South Lakes, 0 in
-940 at Westfield, 702 in (net -238)

It looks like in every scenario, the same areas on the western edge of Chantilly and the northern/western edge of Centreville will be pulled in to fill up Westfield.

Yup. Looks like Seema Dixit will get her Greenbriar East “fix” by dumping some high density housing into Westfield. It’s not the GB East split feeder portion from Fairfax HS to Oakton HS that was originally planned, but Fairfax HS to a Chantilly HS instead. Her people will be happy.

They are taking quite a big of high density housing out of Westfield, too.

They are adding in a bunch of low income housing from CVHS though. Not sure how that will shake out except CVHS will end up a much lower farms rate than it is now.

Coates has very high FARMS--and it is being removed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the options leave Centreville with under 2000 kids. Seems like that planned expansion to 3000 has to be cancelled now. Wonder if they’ll still try to expand it to 2500 to take Willow Springs at some point. They may want to build Centreville back up and let Fairfax HS be the school that eventually shrinks.

They’re already carving out bits of Fairfax HS and sending them to Chantilly and Oakton.

There are some areas that are very close to Chantilly but really far from Fairfax and they should probably go to Chantilly if they move some of the Chantilly kids to western. I hear that some parts of oak Hill that are currently zoned for Oakton will be moved to WHS however I looked at the maps and see no indication of that. Does anyone have links to maps that support this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

By ‘helping Lewis’ does that mean you want your children to go to Lewis instead?

It’s pretty blatant that there are a lot of fake advocates for Lewis. The sudden support for fixing Lewis and sending more students then makes it clear that a few fringe neighborhoods are suggesting “the other fringe” areas get sent there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the options leave Centreville with under 2000 kids. Seems like that planned expansion to 3000 has to be cancelled now. Wonder if they’ll still try to expand it to 2500 to take Willow Springs at some point. They may want to build Centreville back up and let Fairfax HS be the school that eventually shrinks.

They’re already carving out bits of Fairfax HS and sending them to Chantilly and Oakton.

There are some areas that are very close to Chantilly but really far from Fairfax and they should probably go to Chantilly if they move some of the Chantilly kids to western. I hear that some parts of oak Hill that are currently zoned for Oakton will be moved to WHS however I looked at the maps and see no indication of that. Does anyone have links to maps that support this?

from a post on KAA thread:

https://imgur.com/a/eLHtbJi

Franklin Farm/Crossfield in Options A, C, and D

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so puzzling that that Sangster neighborhood is upset about being rezoned to... Lake Braddock of all places.

It’s so puzzling that others feel the need to tell neighborhoods how they should feel about being moved from a school community— one that they are well established in.

It’s puzzling that Sangster families feel the need to complain about going to Lake Braddock when other neighborhoods around, including those in Hunt Valley, Daventry and West Springfield elementary could be moved to Lewis. Those neighborhoods also feel part of the WSHS community but they could be moved to the other side of the mixing bowl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so puzzling that that Sangster neighborhood is upset about being rezoned to... Lake Braddock of all places.

It’s so puzzling that others feel the need to tell neighborhoods how they should feel about being moved from a school community— one that they are well established in.

It’s puzzling that Sangster families feel the need to complain about going to Lake Braddock when other neighborhoods around, including those in Hunt Valley, Daventry and West Springfield elementary could be moved to Lewis. Those neighborhoods also feel part of the WSHS community but they could be moved to the other side of the mixing bowl.

It sounds like more families will need to be moved to Lewis in the future anyway Especially if Rolling Valley kids move to WS.

[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.

The process has been mismanaged but eliminating split feeders has always been a goal. That is a fact. Just because it wasn’t done at all schools across the county, and where it ranked on whatever priority list you point to doesn’t invalidate that.

Uggg ..again. Who said split feeders were an issue in the first place? An outside consultant who didn't know the region? A country wide survey of parents and teachers? Or was this just an 'idea' from one main board member who is running the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so puzzling that that Sangster neighborhood is upset about being rezoned to... Lake Braddock of all places.

It’s so puzzling that others feel the need to tell neighborhoods how they should feel about being moved from a school community— one that they are well established in.

It’s puzzling that Sangster families feel the need to complain about going to Lake Braddock when other neighborhoods around, including those in Hunt Valley, Daventry and West Springfield elementary could be moved to Lewis. Those neighborhoods also feel part of the WSHS community but they could be moved to the other side of the mixing bowl.

This is exactly what the board was counting on .. neighbors fighting each other so it's harder to focus on the bigger issues. Well done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so puzzling that that Sangster neighborhood is upset about being rezoned to... Lake Braddock of all places.

It’s so puzzling that others feel the need to tell neighborhoods how they should feel about being moved from a school community— one that they are well established in.

It’s puzzling that Sangster families feel the need to complain about going to Lake Braddock when other neighborhoods around, including those in Hunt Valley, Daventry and West Springfield elementary could be moved to Lewis. Those neighborhoods also feel part of the WSHS community but they could be moved to the other side of the mixing bowl.

Stop talking about Lewis, and saying people should be thankful for not going there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the options leave Centreville with under 2000 kids. Seems like that planned expansion to 3000 has to be cancelled now. Wonder if they’ll still try to expand it to 2500 to take Willow Springs at some point. They may want to build Centreville back up and let Fairfax HS be the school that eventually shrinks.

They’re already carving out bits of Fairfax HS and sending them to Chantilly and Oakton.

Wonder if the long term plan is to leave FHS to the city and get out all the county kids.

[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.

The process has been mismanaged but eliminating split feeders has always been a goal. That is a fact. Just because it wasn’t done at all schools across the county, and where it ranked on whatever priority list you point to doesn’t invalidate that.

Uggg ..again. Who said split feeders were an issue in the first place? An outside consultant who didn't know the region? A country wide survey of parents and teachers? Or was this just an 'idea' from one main board member who is running the process.

Eliminating split feeders is set forth as a goal in the policy on school boundaries (Policy 8130) that the current school board revised last year.

It sounds nice in theory to have elementary schools that feed 100% to a middle school that in turn feeds 100% to a high school. Then you’d have true “pyramids” where kids stay together though high school.

It’s also totally impractical in a school system like FCPS given the locations of schools and the mismatches between the capacities of middle schools and high schools. And, as we’ve seen, people will repeatedly defend split feeders where they like the schools to which their kids are currently zoned.

Had the School Board engaged in more outreach before amending the policy, this would have been pointed out repeatedly, but they rushed ahead, because they saw the revised policy as their opportunity to engage in equity-driven redistricting under the guise of “efficiency.” Keep in mind the revised policy also prioritizes things like reducing transportation times.

But, once again, they’ve gotten cold feet, so we’ll end up with a grab bag of changes where the loudest parents get their way and others may get steamrolled so the board can claim they’ve done something important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is so puzzling that that Sangster neighborhood is upset about being rezoned to... Lake Braddock of all places.

It’s so puzzling that others feel the need to tell neighborhoods how they should feel about being moved from a school community— one that they are well established in.

It’s puzzling that Sangster families feel the need to complain about going to Lake Braddock when other neighborhoods around, including those in Hunt Valley, Daventry and West Springfield elementary could be moved to Lewis. Those neighborhoods also feel part of the WSHS community but they could be moved to the other side of the mixing bowl.

So Sangster parents should fall on their swords for the greater good? Hunt Valley was offered South County and they rejected it. Nobody wants to leave WSHS, of course they’re going to fight to stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the options leave Centreville with under 2000 kids. Seems like that planned expansion to 3000 has to be cancelled now. Wonder if they’ll still try to expand it to 2500 to take Willow Springs at some point. They may want to build Centreville back up and let Fairfax HS be the school that eventually shrinks.

They’re already carving out bits of Fairfax HS and sending them to Chantilly and Oakton.

Wonder if the long term plan is to leave FHS to the city and get out all the county kids.

You’d think if there was space that the County would put kids into County HS instead of FHS, that said not sure if there is anything in the contract that requires FCPS to maintain a certain number of students at FHS.

[Anonymous]

Do the four KaA scenario maps include the other changes Thru is proposing in that area?