School Boundaries and "One Fairfax"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief. Let FCPS actually start a boundary study and identify different options. After hearing about the Langley parents who protested at a School Board meeting because they are terrified of their kids having to interact with Herndon kids, we have little interest in sending our kids there, but let the chips fall where they may. The lobbying about who should move is premature and distasteful.

Not everyone is so complacent.

Some people like to have a say in matters that affect them and their children. If you are content to simply let life happen to you, that is your choice.

So you think repeatedly expressing your own personal preference as to which neighborhoods get moved into (or perhaps out of) your school on an anonymous message board is really going to move the needle, when there isn’t even a timeline for a boundary study yet?

I guess my neighbors and I just have a different approach to advocacy.

According to your own words you don't advocate. You "let the chips fall where they may."

First you criticized Langley parents advocating for what they perceive as their best interests because you like to chill.

When it is pointed out to you that such an attitude is not good life strategy, you attempt to deflect by making the baseless statement that my advocacy is limited to message board conversations.

I do hope for your sake that your neighbors do, in fact, have some ideas about the best ways to advocate. Maybe they take a longer view than you do and can think more than half a step ahead.

I think you’re reading too much into the phrase - all that was meant was it will be decided in due course (that is, after an actual study where multiple options are presented and discussed).

Are you really this disagreeable about everything?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in facilities. Nothing, and I mean nothing beyond capacity expansions is happening, until the new Western High School is funded and built. When that happens, then yes, there will be a very large rewriting of boundaries. But until then, this is all nonsense to essentially undermine the new school from every being built because nothing will ever change.

Are you saying Facilities is so incompetent that it doesn’t plan to adjust the boundaries between overcrowded and under-enrolled high schools for at least a decade?

Not sure if you’re a troll, but if what you say is true then Brabrand is unlikely to last another school year. The BOS will want him out and the School Board will fire him to keep the money flowing.

What I am saying is that we aren't given much leeway. The entire preference has been to expand capacity over shifting capacity to different schools. As this thread shows, even talking about making major changes sparks an insane amount of blow back. People complain less about just making the schools bigger to meet demand.

Right now, there are no immediate plans or plans anytime soon to change any of the high schools. Nothing is happening beyond us getting data and talking through expansions, fwiw.

I think that is last year’s story. If you don’t start balancing the high school enrollments soon, you’ll face criticism the likes of which FCPS leadership has rarely seen. Brabrand will not survive it, nor will Platenberg.

I mean this in the nicest way. What should we do? Because this thread is a perfect example of the nonsense when it comes to making decisions. We are doing things to avoid blow back from parents who don't want certain populations in their schools, we are getting blow back from parents and board members who want to pursue changes but only if we make sure we are taking into account poverty. I spent hours in meetings where we basically go back and forth. We have the data to do a massive boundary change now to essentially have no school over 110 percent capacity (so, minimum modulars and trailers folks). It is basically dead in the water. Because building more is an easy yes and I am just doing my job and I really have no power to make these choices where blow back is inevitable.

Racist cowards.

[Anonymous]

I mean this in the nicest way. What should we do? Because this thread is a perfect example of the nonsense when it comes to making decisions. We are doing things to avoid blow back from parents who don't want certain populations in their schools, we are getting blow back from parents and board members who want to pursue changes but only if we make sure we are taking into account poverty. I spent hours in meetings where we basically go back and forth. We have the data to do a massive boundary change now to essentially have no school over 110 percent capacity (so, minimum modulars and trailers folks). It is basically dead in the water. Because building more is an easy yes and I am just doing my job and I really have no power to make these choices where blow back is inevitable.

You go back to using proximity/time travel as the main focus.
You use logic and common sense--You leave as many neighborhoods as possible where they are. Value the sense of community. Communities prefer to stay where they are.
When you must move a neighborhood from one school to another--you take SES into consideration, but also take into account unintended consequences--i.e. is the school going to be accessible to the community? Is transportation going to be a problem?

You do not move kids for no good reason other than diversity. If you really want to tick off all parents, that is a good way to do it.

You do not shift kids around just because you can.

You get rid of IB. This will reduce PP out of schools that need more kids.

You address the issue of poverty and education where it is--you do not try to cover it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work in facilities. Nothing, and I mean nothing beyond capacity expansions is happening, until the new Western High School is funded and built. When that happens, then yes, there will be a very large rewriting of boundaries. But until then, this is all nonsense to essentially undermine the new school from every being built because nothing will ever change.

Are you saying Facilities is so incompetent that it doesn’t plan to adjust the boundaries between overcrowded and under-enrolled high schools for at least a decade?

Not sure if you’re a troll, but if what you say is true then Brabrand is unlikely to last another school year. The BOS will want him out and the School Board will fire him to keep the money flowing.

What I am saying is that we aren't given much leeway. The entire preference has been to expand capacity over shifting capacity to different schools. As this thread shows, even talking about making major changes sparks an insane amount of blow back. People complain less about just making the schools bigger to meet demand.

Right now, there are no immediate plans or plans anytime soon to change any of the high schools. Nothing is happening beyond us getting data and talking through expansions, fwiw.

I think that is last year’s story. If you don’t start balancing the high school enrollments soon, you’ll face criticism the likes of which FCPS leadership has rarely seen. Brabrand will not survive it, nor will Platenberg.

I mean this in the nicest way. What should we do? Because this thread is a perfect example of the nonsense when it comes to making decisions. We are doing things to avoid blow back from parents who don't want certain populations in their schools, we are getting blow back from parents and board members who want to pursue changes but only if we make sure we are taking into account poverty. I spent hours in meetings where we basically go back and forth. We have the data to do a massive boundary change now to essentially have no school over 110 percent capacity (so, minimum modulars and trailers folks). It is basically dead in the water. Because building more is an easy yes and I am just doing my job and I really have no power to make these choices where blow back is inevitable.

Racist cowards.

Blowback to a massive boundary change any time soon would be inevitable.

The school board can change the boundaries, but they can't force anyone to keep their children in the school system.

[Anonymous]

Nobody is going to like a massive boundary change, that's just the truth.

I will say for the second or third time on this thread that the general Langley focus is not to be broken up and send kids to different places. If there is capacity, send whatever kids make the most sense to fill that gap, Tysons, whatever it may be. The Langley focus is to keep the neighborhood feeling that exists in Great Falls.

It doesn't fit the narrative here or the attaching of motive that is really easy to sell in the current political environment (wealthy person is to blame for any problems in the world) but that's not the truth. Great Falls has a unique neighborhood feel in part due to it's natural boundary of Rte 7 that makes it feel like a neighborhood more than most places in FXCO or the DC area. you don't know when you have crossed over from Herndon to Reston, for instance but you do feel that you enter a neighborhood when you enter Great Falls and that is what people are trying to protect. Everyone here buys knowing that in some cases Langley is a bit of a drive but do it anyway and don't care.

Tell GF that they don't have to split up the community and backfill the extra capacity with whatever you feel is reasonable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is going to like a massive boundary change, that's just the truth.

I will say for the second or third time on this thread that the general Langley focus is not to be broken up and send kids to different places. If there is capacity, send whatever kids make the most sense to fill that gap, Tysons, whatever it may be. The Langley focus is to keep the neighborhood feeling that exists in Great Falls.

It doesn't fit the narrative here or the attaching of motive that is really easy to sell in the current political environment (wealthy person is to blame for any problems in the world) but that's not the truth. Great Falls has a unique neighborhood feel in part due to it's natural boundary of Rte 7 that makes it feel like a neighborhood more than most places in FXCO or the DC area. you don't know when you have crossed over from Herndon to Reston, for instance but you do feel that you enter a neighborhood when you enter Great Falls and that is what people are trying to protect. Everyone here buys knowing that in some cases Langley is a bit of a drive but do it anyway and don't care.

Tell GF that they don't have to split up the community and backfill the extra capacity with whatever you feel is reasonable

I have attended multiple meetings related to boundaries recently where I have heard Great Falls parents say they want to avoid Herndon because of gangs; attribute growth in the county to FCPS “letting all the illegals in”; and, in some cases, say they oppose moving any McLean students to Langley because increases the odds of Langley kids moving to Herndon some day

Great Falls is just one part of unincorporated Fairfax County. It’s hard to know when you are in western McLean or eastern Great Falls, and many of the subdivisions in western Great Falls out towards Loudoun are similar to subdivisions in Vienna or Oakton.

Few of us want to change school districts, but the Langley parents have been particularly vociferous in objecting to changes that are unlikely to happen for years, if ever. If and when FCPS builds a high school in western Fairfax, part of Langley may need to move to Herndon, just like part of McLean may be forced to move to Langley soon, parts of Oakton, Madison and Westfield were moved to South Lakes back in 2008, and other neighborhoods were redistricted when Westfield and South County were built. The more you keep trying to claim GF deserves special treatment, the less persuasive you appear. Why not simply point out that you’d like to stay at your (under-enrolled) high school until there is a compelling need to change the boundaries? Then you’d actually come across as having something in common with everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is going to like a massive boundary change, that's just the truth.

I will say for the second or third time on this thread that the general Langley focus is not to be broken up and send kids to different places. If there is capacity, send whatever kids make the most sense to fill that gap, Tysons, whatever it may be. The Langley focus is to keep the neighborhood feeling that exists in Great Falls.

It doesn't fit the narrative here or the attaching of motive that is really easy to sell in the current political environment (wealthy person is to blame for any problems in the world) but that's not the truth. Great Falls has a unique neighborhood feel in part due to it's natural boundary of Rte 7 that makes it feel like a neighborhood more than most places in FXCO or the DC area. you don't know when you have crossed over from Herndon to Reston, for instance but you do feel that you enter a neighborhood when you enter Great Falls and that is what people are trying to protect. Everyone here buys knowing that in some cases Langley is a bit of a drive but do it anyway and don't care.

Tell GF that they don't have to split up the community and backfill the extra capacity with whatever you feel is reasonable

I have attended multiple meetings related to boundaries recently where I have heard Great Falls parents say they want to avoid Herndon because of gangs; attribute growth in the county to FCPS “letting all the illegals in”; and, in some cases, say they oppose moving any McLean students to Langley because increases the odds of Langley kids moving to Herndon some day

Great Falls is just one part of unincorporated Fairfax County. It’s hard to know when you are in western McLean or eastern Great Falls, and many of the subdivisions in western Great Falls out towards Loudoun are similar to subdivisions in Vienna or Oakton.

Few of us want to change school districts, but the Langley parents have been particularly vociferous in objecting to changes that are unlikely to happen for years, if ever. If and when FCPS builds a high school in western Fairfax, part of Langley may need to move to Herndon, just like part of McLean may be forced to move to Langley soon, parts of Oakton, Madison and Westfield were moved to South Lakes back in 2008, and other neighborhoods were redistricted when Westfield and South County were built. The more you keep trying to claim GF deserves special treatment, the less persuasive you appear. Why not simply point out that you’d like to stay at your (under-enrolled) high school until there is a compelling need to change the boundaries? Then you’d actually come across as having something in common with everyone else.

Question out here from Oak Hill--who will go to Langley if they do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good grief. Let FCPS actually start a boundary study and identify different options. After hearing about the Langley parents who protested at a School Board meeting because they are terrified of their kids having to interact with Herndon kids, we have little interest in sending our kids there, but let the chips fall where they may. The lobbying about who should move is premature and distasteful.

Not everyone is so complacent.

Some people like to have a say in matters that affect them and their children. If you are content to simply let life happen to you, that is your choice.

So you think repeatedly expressing your own personal preference as to which neighborhoods get moved into (or perhaps out of) your school on an anonymous message board is really going to move the needle, when there isn’t even a timeline for a boundary study yet?

I guess my neighbors and I just have a different approach to advocacy.

According to your own words you don't advocate. You "let the chips fall where they may."

First you criticized Langley parents advocating for what they perceive as their best interests because you like to chill.

When it is pointed out to you that such an attitude is not good life strategy, you attempt to deflect by making the baseless statement that my advocacy is limited to message board conversations.

I do hope for your sake that your neighbors do, in fact, have some ideas about the best ways to advocate. Maybe they take a longer view than you do and can think more than half a step ahead.

I think you’re reading too much into the phrase - all that was meant was it will be decided in due course (that is, after an actual study where multiple options are presented and discussed).

Are you really this disagreeable about everything?

Yes, we know. People shouldn't get exercised about things until it's too late to affect the outcome. Let the chips fall where they may, it will all be decided (for you) in due course, just relax, and deal with it later.

[Anonymous]

It’s really time to so,it Fairfax County in two. It’s a lumbering barely governable mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

As a taxpayer, I would rather have tax money "bussed" to schools that need additional resources and have them spend it in ways that will help the populations that need it, including parenting classes, ESOL for parents, night school, whatever. Break the cycle in the communities that suffer from the cycle.

This.
It's a lot easier to get parents involved if they are comfortable in the environment.

+1.

This has been tried (segregation) and has failed all over the US prompting the federal government to get involved starting with Bush. We are learning from our mistakes.

If they don't want the affluent to leave (assuming boundaries are redrawn to equalize FARMS across the county--30% ish and who knows what it will be 5-10 years from now) they are going to have to *prove* that it will benefit their kids and not only everyone else, and anecdotal evidence will not be enough.

If they can prove benefit for all, there shouldn't be a problem.

[Anonymous]

So the self-centered Langley people are trying to rebrand their “One Great Falls” group as “Voices of Fairfax”?

LOL. I was hoping for something more Teutonic like “Langley Uber Alles.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the self-centered Langley people are trying to rebrand their “One Great Falls” group as “Voices of Fairfax”?

LOL. I was hoping for something more Teutonic like “Langley Uber Alles.”

If you think their plans are limited to Langley, you think wrong.
They will not even limit it to high schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the self-centered Langley people are trying to rebrand their “One Great Falls” group as “Voices of Fairfax”?

LOL. I was hoping for something more Teutonic like “Langley Uber Alles.”

If you think their plans are limited to Langley, you think wrong.
They will not even limit it to high schools.

Their plans under the new name still seem to focus on getting people to sign a petition objecting to ever redistricting anyone out of Langley (“Mein School”).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the self-centered Langley people are trying to rebrand their “One Great Falls” group as “Voices of Fairfax”?

LOL. I was hoping for something more Teutonic like “Langley Uber Alles.”

If you think their plans are limited to Langley, you think wrong.
They will not even limit it to high schools.

Their plans under the new name still seem to focus on getting people to sign a petition objecting to ever redistricting anyone out of Langley (“Mein School”).

Wow. You totally misunderstood. I guess your hatred shows. I was talking about the School Board.

You seem to think their plans are limited to Langley.

And, by the way, your comment is hateful. Just like the SB. Strauss mocking people is way out of line. Hynes' arrogance speaks for itself. Which schools did their kids attend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is going to like a massive boundary change, that's just the truth.

I will say for the second or third time on this thread that the general Langley focus is not to be broken up and send kids to different places. If there is capacity, send whatever kids make the most sense to fill that gap, Tysons, whatever it may be. The Langley focus is to keep the neighborhood feeling that exists in Great Falls.

It doesn't fit the narrative here or the attaching of motive that is really easy to sell in the current political environment (wealthy person is to blame for any problems in the world) but that's not the truth. Great Falls has a unique neighborhood feel in part due to it's natural boundary of Rte 7 that makes it feel like a neighborhood more than most places in FXCO or the DC area. you don't know when you have crossed over from Herndon to Reston, for instance but you do feel that you enter a neighborhood when you enter Great Falls and that is what people are trying to protect. Everyone here buys knowing that in some cases Langley is a bit of a drive but do it anyway and don't care.

Tell GF that they don't have to split up the community and backfill the extra capacity with whatever you feel is reasonable

A large percentage of Langley students are currently being bussed 16+ miles to Langley. We are keeping the current boundaries why again?