Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:No one want to join Nottingham. Even in N Arlington. You’ve alienated just about everyone with your prior and current style Of “advocacy.”
In that case, you should want us to stay at our own school.
Because otherwise we’ll be coming to your’s! Help us advocate to keep Nottingham open so that our abhorrent values and alienating nature don’t infiltrate the whole of North Arlington.
Oh, that's clearly never going to happen! You'd sooner move to Montana than come to my kids' schools south of 50. Of course, the rest of your comment indicates you don't consider south Arlington part of the picture anyway. But you'd probably do better to solicit south Arlington support, if south Arlington schools end up being the ones destined for the swing space.
They're your best bet arguing about the inconvenient and unfeasible location.
So we are on the same page!
NP. I'm in SA and our school desperately needs a reno, and I think the proposal is the best and most cost-efficient way to improve our school and the others that need it. I fully support this plan and would have no problem moving locations for one year, even if it's not that convenient. It would be better than staying in our building through construction, noise, and dust.
What if, as an alternative, you could go to Fairlington? Do you wonder if APS seriously considered that as an option? Or what if you could go to a state of the art classroom at Amazon? Aren’t you curious whether APS placed a call to them to ask? Or maybe Syphax would be closer and more convenient? Does it make you wonder whether it’s anything other than APS’s office-work policy that shut down that option?
It’s not Nottingham or nothing, and you ought to press your elected leaders to get a little more creative in their thinking. You say it’s the best choice but you history have no idea… APS doesn’t either. And that’s the point. They were so laser focused on closing a north Arlington school that they literally didn’t try to find any other solution.
For the umpteenth time, Fairlington is not available to APS until the County makes it available and they are not interested in doing so.
They chose a NA school because of its enrollment amid multiple neighboring NA schools also with below-capacity enrollments.
It is far FASTER and CHEAPER to re-use an existing operating elementary school as an elementary school than to renovate a community center (that isn't even in APS' authority to use) or to find another location for central admin and the SB and convert that LEASED space into swing space that can accommodate preschool and elementary school.
I think their idea is fine. I don't believe it's actually going to happen because APS won't have its crap together to proceed with school renovations by the time the NES proposal is to take effect. By the time they're actually ready to begin using swing space, there probably won't be enough capacity in NW to do what they're currently proposing to do. On that point, it might end up being just as feasible from a timeframe standpoint to find some empty office buildings and do some other major renovations to create a swing space. But it will cost a LOT more. A LOT. Then the complaints will be that APS is wasting too much money creating a temporary space. And those complaints would probably be justified.