APS Closing Nottingham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These PTA groups do not speak for people. It's so annoying to me. It's half a dozen self-interested types who then make it seem as if they represent a collective view. It's BS. I've been at two N Arl elementary schools and it's the same thing.

PTAs should stick to what they are for...supporting teachers and finding ways to do more for our kids. Stay out of advocacy and lobbying the school board. We are all perfectly capable of speaking up for ourselves individually and it also annoys me that the School Board and APS actually treat these PTAs with outsized importance. Why do they get a bigger seat at the table than any of the rest of us?

You know your school’s PTA membership elects the PTA board right?

You have to show up to the meeting where they elect them. How many people bother to do that? Not many. That's at least how it worked at both the schools I've been at. I have never once voted for a member of a PTA board and I'm going on my 8th school of having kids in an elementary school. I am grateful for what they do for the school but think they should stay in their lane and not represent their views as the whole community's views.

If you don’t go to meetings and don’t vote for them, then you can’t complain they aren’t listening to your views.

Is anyone reading what I'm writing? I am not complaining that they don't listen to my views. I'm saying they should stay out of this stuff and allow individuals to speak up and encourage people to do so. I am saying they should not claim to represent everyone.

but that's literally their role, to represent their communities and advocate for their needs.

I have been told that in Fairfax it is not common for PTAs to get involved in boundary discussions. It's seen as not their role. Because it really shouldn't be. I understand Nottingham isn't specifically a traditional boundary issue. But as a more general point...the reason why they wouldn't engage in this is there are obviously a lot of conflicting needs and viewpoints among any school community when boundaries come up. It's asinine to act like the PTA can represent one point of view and advocate for it on issues like this and they should stay out of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These PTA groups do not speak for people. It's so annoying to me. It's half a dozen self-interested types who then make it seem as if they represent a collective view. It's BS. I've been at two N Arl elementary schools and it's the same thing.

PTAs should stick to what they are for...supporting teachers and finding ways to do more for our kids. Stay out of advocacy and lobbying the school board. We are all perfectly capable of speaking up for ourselves individually and it also annoys me that the School Board and APS actually treat these PTAs with outsized importance. Why do they get a bigger seat at the table than any of the rest of us?

You know your school’s PTA membership elects the PTA board right?

You know that the more engaged communities and more representative PTAs are from wealthier schools, right?
You know what a struggle it is to get anyone to a PTA meeting, let alone volunteer to be an officer is, especially at our Title 1 schools, right?
So then, you know that any PTA board at schools with a bare-bones, low membership PTA is representing the entire school based on the voices of a handful of people, right?

Even the wealthier schools, the PTA leadership is representing a small slice and not everyone in their community feels one way.

Then they should go to the pta meetings and speak up.

Sometimes people do and it doesn’t matter. I was at McKinley during their whole battle to keep their school. It is not a comfortable environment to sit in a room with a small group of the most A+++ type obnoxious personalities (many who you will see tomorrow in the hallway) and disagree with their point of view and oh by the way even if you do speak up they move forward with their position anyway.

Waste of time. People are better off speaking to School Board members directly and engaging directly with APS.

Ok so what you're saying is that you were in the minority and the McKinley PTA went with the majority view in your school community. That's exactly what they are supposed to do. They are not supposed to pander to the minority or to you specifically. One person doesn't get to dictate the PTA position. You are free to vocalize your individual views yourself, which is sounds like you did. What's the issue then?

Self-interested people put themselves in the position to dominate the PTA. Isn't this obvious? I was at McKinley at that time. The Madison Manor and Dominion Hills neighborhoods dominated the PTA because...self-interest. They were the walkable ones who freaked out when McKinley was going to become ATS and they were the ones on the potential block to not go to Cardinal. Dominion Hills was originally suggested to go to Ashlawn and Madison Manor really could have easily gone to Tuckahoe. Meanwhile, those neighborhoods were not the majority of that school.

I always thought the ATS move made sense and thought the things our PTA was saying were bonkers/misleading at times and knew lots of people who felt that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to the point the CCPTA Prez made in her board comment? She said there isn't funding to renovate schools for several years, so APS's plan would close Nottingham and then leave it empty for years. Is this true???

Yes. Because so much money has already been allocated to Career Center and other projects, there will not be enough money or bond capacity for a project large enough to warrant swing space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These PTA groups do not speak for people. It's so annoying to me. It's half a dozen self-interested types who then make it seem as if they represent a collective view. It's BS. I've been at two N Arl elementary schools and it's the same thing.

PTAs should stick to what they are for...supporting teachers and finding ways to do more for our kids. Stay out of advocacy and lobbying the school board. We are all perfectly capable of speaking up for ourselves individually and it also annoys me that the School Board and APS actually treat these PTAs with outsized importance. Why do they get a bigger seat at the table than any of the rest of us?

You know your school’s PTA membership elects the PTA board right?

You know that the more engaged communities and more representative PTAs are from wealthier schools, right?
You know what a struggle it is to get anyone to a PTA meeting, let alone volunteer to be an officer is, especially at our Title 1 schools, right?
So then, you know that any PTA board at schools with a bare-bones, low membership PTA is representing the entire school based on the voices of a handful of people, right?

Even the wealthier schools, the PTA leadership is representing a small slice and not everyone in their community feels one way.

Then they should go to the pta meetings and speak up.

Sometimes people do and it doesn’t matter. I was at McKinley during their whole battle to keep their school. It is not a comfortable environment to sit in a room with a small group of the most A+++ type obnoxious personalities (many who you will see tomorrow in the hallway) and disagree with their point of view and oh by the way even if you do speak up they move forward with their position anyway.

Waste of time. People are better off speaking to School Board members directly and engaging directly with APS.

Ok so what you're saying is that you were in the minority and the McKinley PTA went with the majority view in your school community. That's exactly what they are supposed to do. They are not supposed to pander to the minority or to you specifically. One person doesn't get to dictate the PTA position. You are free to vocalize your individual views yourself, which is sounds like you did. What's the issue then?

Not this poster but who knows if it's the minority view with a school filled with 700+ families and 20 people dominate the PTA. That's how it is at all these schools with the pushiest PTAs.

you don't but the PTA board knows what they are hearing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to the point the CCPTA Prez made in her board comment? She said there isn't funding to renovate schools for several years, so APS's plan would close Nottingham and then leave it empty for years. Is this true???

Yes. Because so much money has already been allocated to Career Center and other projects, there will not be enough money or bond capacity for a project large enough to warrant swing space.

so then it would appear her point is correct, why close a school when there is no need to close it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These PTA groups do not speak for people. It's so annoying to me. It's half a dozen self-interested types who then make it seem as if they represent a collective view. It's BS. I've been at two N Arl elementary schools and it's the same thing.

PTAs should stick to what they are for...supporting teachers and finding ways to do more for our kids. Stay out of advocacy and lobbying the school board. We are all perfectly capable of speaking up for ourselves individually and it also annoys me that the School Board and APS actually treat these PTAs with outsized importance. Why do they get a bigger seat at the table than any of the rest of us?

You know your school’s PTA membership elects the PTA board right?

You have to show up to the meeting where they elect them. How many people bother to do that? Not many. That's at least how it worked at both the schools I've been at. I have never once voted for a member of a PTA board and I'm going on my 8th school of having kids in an elementary school. I am grateful for what they do for the school but think they should stay in their lane and not represent their views as the whole community's views.

If you don’t go to meetings and don’t vote for them, then you can’t complain they aren’t listening to your views.

Is anyone reading what I'm writing? I am not complaining that they don't listen to my views. I'm saying they should stay out of this stuff and allow individuals to speak up and encourage people to do so. I am saying they should not claim to represent everyone.

but that's literally their role, to represent their communities and advocate for their needs.

I have been told that in Fairfax it is not common for PTAs to get involved in boundary discussions. It's seen as not their role. Because it really shouldn't be. I understand Nottingham isn't specifically a traditional boundary issue. But as a more general point...the reason why they wouldn't engage in this is there are obviously a lot of conflicting needs and viewpoints among any school community when boundaries come up. It's asinine to act like the PTA can represent one point of view and advocate for it on issues like this and they should stay out of it.

Nottingham isn't a boundary issue. We're not talking boundaries right now. This is very different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These PTA groups do not speak for people. It's so annoying to me. It's half a dozen self-interested types who then make it seem as if they represent a collective view. It's BS. I've been at two N Arl elementary schools and it's the same thing.

PTAs should stick to what they are for...supporting teachers and finding ways to do more for our kids. Stay out of advocacy and lobbying the school board. We are all perfectly capable of speaking up for ourselves individually and it also annoys me that the School Board and APS actually treat these PTAs with outsized importance. Why do they get a bigger seat at the table than any of the rest of us?

You know your school’s PTA membership elects the PTA board right?

You know that the more engaged communities and more representative PTAs are from wealthier schools, right?
You know what a struggle it is to get anyone to a PTA meeting, let alone volunteer to be an officer is, especially at our Title 1 schools, right?
So then, you know that any PTA board at schools with a bare-bones, low membership PTA is representing the entire school based on the voices of a handful of people, right?

Even the wealthier schools, the PTA leadership is representing a small slice and not everyone in their community feels one way.

Then they should go to the pta meetings and speak up.

Sometimes people do and it doesn’t matter. I was at McKinley during their whole battle to keep their school. It is not a comfortable environment to sit in a room with a small group of the most A+++ type obnoxious personalities (many who you will see tomorrow in the hallway) and disagree with their point of view and oh by the way even if you do speak up they move forward with their position anyway.

Waste of time. People are better off speaking to School Board members directly and engaging directly with APS.

Ok so what you're saying is that you were in the minority and the McKinley PTA went with the majority view in your school community. That's exactly what they are supposed to do. They are not supposed to pander to the minority or to you specifically. One person doesn't get to dictate the PTA position. You are free to vocalize your individual views yourself, which is sounds like you did. What's the issue then?

Self-interested people put themselves in the position to dominate the PTA. Isn't this obvious? I was at McKinley at that time. The Madison Manor and Dominion Hills neighborhoods dominated the PTA because...self-interest. They were the walkable ones who freaked out when McKinley was going to become ATS and they were the ones on the potential block to not go to Cardinal. Dominion Hills was originally suggested to go to Ashlawn and Madison Manor really could have easily gone to Tuckahoe. Meanwhile, those neighborhoods were not the majority of that school.

I always thought the ATS move made sense and thought the things our PTA was saying were bonkers/misleading at times and knew lots of people who felt that way.

again this just gets back to you didn't agree with the majority position on your PTA. Take that up with your PTA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:True. But you also can’t deluge every forum with self interested Notties and call that “overwhelming opposition.”

what would you call it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These PTA groups do not speak for people. It's so annoying to me. It's half a dozen self-interested types who then make it seem as if they represent a collective view. It's BS. I've been at two N Arl elementary schools and it's the same thing.

PTAs should stick to what they are for...supporting teachers and finding ways to do more for our kids. Stay out of advocacy and lobbying the school board. We are all perfectly capable of speaking up for ourselves individually and it also annoys me that the School Board and APS actually treat these PTAs with outsized importance. Why do they get a bigger seat at the table than any of the rest of us?

You know your school’s PTA membership elects the PTA board right?

You know that the more engaged communities and more representative PTAs are from wealthier schools, right?
You know what a struggle it is to get anyone to a PTA meeting, let alone volunteer to be an officer is, especially at our Title 1 schools, right?
So then, you know that any PTA board at schools with a bare-bones, low membership PTA is representing the entire school based on the voices of a handful of people, right?

Even the wealthier schools, the PTA leadership is representing a small slice and not everyone in their community feels one way.

Then they should go to the pta meetings and speak up.

Sometimes people do and it doesn’t matter. I was at McKinley during their whole battle to keep their school. It is not a comfortable environment to sit in a room with a small group of the most A+++ type obnoxious personalities (many who you will see tomorrow in the hallway) and disagree with their point of view and oh by the way even if you do speak up they move forward with their position anyway.

Waste of time. People are better off speaking to School Board members directly and engaging directly with APS.

Ok so what you're saying is that you were in the minority and the McKinley PTA went with the majority view in your school community. That's exactly what they are supposed to do. They are not supposed to pander to the minority or to you specifically. One person doesn't get to dictate the PTA position. You are free to vocalize your individual views yourself, which is sounds like you did. What's the issue then?

Self-interested people put themselves in the position to dominate the PTA. Isn't this obvious? I was at McKinley at that time. The Madison Manor and Dominion Hills neighborhoods dominated the PTA because...self-interest. They were the walkable ones who freaked out when McKinley was going to become ATS and they were the ones on the potential block to not go to Cardinal. Dominion Hills was originally suggested to go to Ashlawn and Madison Manor really could have easily gone to Tuckahoe. Meanwhile, those neighborhoods were not the majority of that school.

I always thought the ATS move made sense and thought the things our PTA was saying were bonkers/misleading at times and knew lots of people who felt that way.

Ok so you couldn't bother to get involved so you criticize those who did. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to the point the CCPTA Prez made in her board comment? She said there isn't funding to renovate schools for several years, so APS's plan would close Nottingham and then leave it empty for years. Is this true???

Yes. Because so much money has already been allocated to Career Center and other projects, there will not be enough money or bond capacity for a project large enough to warrant swing space.

so then it would appear her point is correct, why close a school when there is no need to close it?

Exactly. If they go through with this, Nottingham will likely stay closed and unused for as many as 6 years before APS has the funding for a major project that could utilize swing space.

Reading between the lines, the issue seems to be that if/when they close Nottingham for swing space, they'll have to do a boundary adjustment for most of North Arlington schools to accommodate these displaced students. But that has a cascading affect on the other schools that will have to send students away to make space for NES (Discovery and Tuckahoe mainly).

And APS says they badly need to do a boundary adjustment ASAP anyway because it was delayed because of covid. So, they want to kill two birds with one stone and do it all at the same time since current guidelines don't allow the same elementary students to be affected by multiple boundary adjustments while they are in ES. So they either have to do it the closure and boundaries at the same time in 2026 (and let NES sit empty for YEARS), keep NES open and wait until the next boundary adjustment change (2036?) to use it as swing space, or ignore the existing guidelines and change when a swing space is actually needed (2032 maybe?). APS is desperately trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to the point the CCPTA Prez made in her board comment? She said there isn't funding to renovate schools for several years, so APS's plan would close Nottingham and then leave it empty for years. Is this true???

Yes. Because so much money has already been allocated to Career Center and other projects, there will not be enough money or bond capacity for a project large enough to warrant swing space.

so then it would appear her point is correct, why close a school when there is no need to close it?

Exactly. If they go through with this, Nottingham will likely stay closed and unused for as many as 6 years before APS has the funding for a major project that could utilize swing space.

Reading between the lines, the issue seems to be that if/when they close Nottingham for swing space, they'll have to do a boundary adjustment for most of North Arlington schools to accommodate these displaced students. But that has a cascading affect on the other schools that will have to send students away to make space for NES (Discovery and Tuckahoe mainly).

And APS says they badly need to do a boundary adjustment ASAP anyway because it was delayed because of covid. So, they want to kill two birds with one stone and do it all at the same time since current guidelines don't allow the same elementary students to be affected by multiple boundary adjustments while they are in ES. So they either have to do it the closure and boundaries at the same time in 2026 (and let NES sit empty for YEARS), keep NES open and wait until the next boundary adjustment change (2036?) to use it as swing space, or ignore the existing guidelines and change when a swing space is actually needed (2032 maybe?). APS is desperately trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

Thx for explanation. But then with #s changing so much and so much uncertainty post covid things may be all off again by the time they actually need to use N'ham for swing space and they may need to do another boundary adjustment then no matter what. What a cluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to the point the CCPTA Prez made in her board comment? She said there isn't funding to renovate schools for several years, so APS's plan would close Nottingham and then leave it empty for years. Is this true???

Yes. Because so much money has already been allocated to Career Center and other projects, there will not be enough money or bond capacity for a project large enough to warrant swing space.

so then it would appear her point is correct, why close a school when there is no need to close it?

Exactly. If they go through with this, Nottingham will likely stay closed and unused for as many as 6 years before APS has the funding for a major project that could utilize swing space.

Reading between the lines, the issue seems to be that if/when they close Nottingham for swing space, they'll have to do a boundary adjustment for most of North Arlington schools to accommodate these displaced students. But that has a cascading affect on the other schools that will have to send students away to make space for NES (Discovery and Tuckahoe mainly).

And APS says they badly need to do a boundary adjustment ASAP anyway because it was delayed because of covid. So, they want to kill two birds with one stone and do it all at the same time since current guidelines don't allow the same elementary students to be affected by multiple boundary adjustments while they are in ES. So they either have to do it the closure and boundaries at the same time in 2026 (and let NES sit empty for YEARS), keep NES open and wait until the next boundary adjustment change (2036?) to use it as swing space, or ignore the existing guidelines and change when a swing space is actually needed (2032 maybe?). APS is desperately trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.

Thx for explanation. But then with #s changing so much and so much uncertainty post covid things may be all off again by the time they actually need to use N'ham for swing space and they may need to do another boundary adjustment then no matter what. What a cluster.

Yep. This is very much the cart before the horse scenario. Figure out what projects you want to do, if you have the money to do them and when you are going to do them. And then figure out your swing space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to the point the CCPTA Prez made in her board comment? She said there isn't funding to renovate schools for several years, so APS's plan would close Nottingham and then leave it empty for years. Is this true???

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we get back to the point the CCPTA Prez made in her board comment? She said there isn't funding to renovate schools for several years, so APS's plan would close Nottingham and then leave it empty for years. Is this true???

No.

Prove it. It is true.

[Anonymous]

It’s for Montessori, and I think that’s all covered in the current CIP, because it’s part of the CC project. No?