FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting that those in favor of the adjustment cannot give good, valid reasons why it is needed. FCPS will spend buckets of money on this.

A)Some schools are over capacity.
B)Some schools are under capacity.
Schools A and B share boundaries.
The end.

Agreed. And just based on what they’ve done with the attendance islands so far, I don’t think they are screaming EQUITY. Some gain richer neighborhoods which debunks this being their ONLY and top reason.

Some seem obviously driven by equity goals but regardless of that fact if they are making unnecessary changes, including changes that seem anti-equity, it’s not a good thing.

I’m going to point out again that some of the changes to address the evil attendance islands create new split feeders, require kids to travel longer distances, and/or widen capacity issues. If they take two schools that are in the 80-90% capacity range, and propose changes that put one school over 100% and another closer to 70%, they are just setting things up for yet more changes down the road.

Agree. One of the changes makes no sense to me, and it gives me the impression that it is a set up.

Did i miss that the boundary study concluded? And changes have been finalized?

God, you are so pedantic.

[Anonymous]

Yay! It’s thesaurus day on DCUM!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yay! It’s thesaurus day on DCUM!!

Anything to counteract the upcoming illogical boundary moves which are a bad solution to an undefined problem.

We still haven’t heard what problems we are actually solving, though we have heard that we are going to postpone solving some real problems because we want the changes to be comprehensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yay! It’s thesaurus day on DCUM!!

Anything to counteract the upcoming illogical boundary moves which are a bad solution to an undefined problem.

We still haven’t heard what problems we are actually solving, though we have heard that we are going to postpone solving some real problems because we want the changes to be comprehensive.

This thread is 200+ pages. You could start at the beginning if you cared about the issues supporters have raised, but you don’t, you just want to argue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yay! It’s thesaurus day on DCUM!!

🤣🤣🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe I am in the minority viewpoint, or it is just that people like me are not too concerned about all this because our houses are not close to a boundary.

You may think you are not close to a boundary, but that does not matter anymore. When I moved here, we were not close to a boundary. We haven't moved, but the boundaries have.
Elementary is safe for us because we are walkers. At least, I think it is safe. Middle school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary. High school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary.

When the boundaries were drawn, there were valid reasons for them. Traffic patterns, overcrowding at some schools, etc. With limited exceptions, that is not true with this boundary study.

This is kind of like going on vacation and having others come in to rearrange your furniture. They throw away what they think is not useful--but is important to you. And, yes, they also rearrange your kitchen so that you cannot find what you frequently use.

Did FCPS promise you that high school in perpetuity?

Did FCPS promise you an equity-based hand-out paid for by your neighbors?

Boundaries changes. All over the country, not just in Fairfax County.

Build a bridge and get over it.

“Get over it.” This is about real impact to real kids so no, I won’t just “get over it”. Since ES, my MS-aged kid has built connections to their zoned HS through sports, music, and academic activities. They visit the HS and know so many of the kids they’ll soon go to school with. Taking that away (and worse, asking them to switch part way through!) isn’t necessary. I’m all for raising resilient kids, but we’ve already asked these kids to be resilient through a pandemic, which significantly disrupted their education and community. What are we trying to achieve through this exercise that’s worth the real impact it will have on kids? I’d prefer that public schools always prioritize the kids.
Also, any data being used to inform decisions isn’t reliable. This area is facing major changes through the ripple effects of downsizing the federal government and curbing immigration. The region needs to stabilize before we use data to make major and costly decisions.

Adjustments need to happen periodically. If it’s not your kid being moved now, it’s somebody else’s kids later. I personally would
have loved for this review to happen years ago, but it’s not about me (or you). Stop taking this personally.

But it IS personal, that’s my point.

Waiting for PP to identify which changes they think are necessary.

Lots of "we need a county-wide boundary study because there hasn't been one in 40 years," or vague statements about supporting a county-wide study without explaining why it's necessary.

Many things have changed over the past 40 years, and perhaps there was a reason why prior, more informed School Boards did not go down that path.

By itself, the fact that it's been 40 years since the last county-wide boundary study isn't compelling at all. It's like saying we need to reinstate Prohibition because it's been 92 years since the last one or admit another state to the Union because it's been 65 years since Hawaii was admitted as a state.

That's not to say boundaries shouldn't ever change. There are a couple of elementary schools with serious overcrowding - Coates and Parklawn. These situation deserve a boundary study, but that doesn't mean a lot of this other crap they are now rolling out is necessary (and, in fact, much of it appears to have been developed by someone playing with some software but with no real understanding of the county). Indeed, this larger study is now slowing down revisions to the Coates and Parklawn boundaries that might have been implmented earlier if they weren't being tied down by the larger review.

Regardless of whether changes are necessary, it is inappropriate to evaluate the wholist state of the situation on a regular basis. The fact that people object to that is incomprehensible. It’s like never looking at your bank statements let alone balancing your check books. Why don’t we just invest our retirement money, don’t make changes to it, and not look for 40 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe I am in the minority viewpoint, or it is just that people like me are not too concerned about all this because our houses are not close to a boundary.

You may think you are not close to a boundary, but that does not matter anymore. When I moved here, we were not close to a boundary. We haven't moved, but the boundaries have.
Elementary is safe for us because we are walkers. At least, I think it is safe. Middle school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary. High school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary.

When the boundaries were drawn, there were valid reasons for them. Traffic patterns, overcrowding at some schools, etc. With limited exceptions, that is not true with this boundary study.

This is kind of like going on vacation and having others come in to rearrange your furniture. They throw away what they think is not useful--but is important to you. And, yes, they also rearrange your kitchen so that you cannot find what you frequently use.

Did FCPS promise you that high school in perpetuity?

Did FCPS promise you an equity-based hand-out paid for by your neighbors?

Boundaries changes. All over the country, not just in Fairfax County.

Build a bridge and get over it.

“Get over it.” This is about real impact to real kids so no, I won’t just “get over it”. Since ES, my MS-aged kid has built connections to their zoned HS through sports, music, and academic activities. They visit the HS and know so many of the kids they’ll soon go to school with. Taking that away (and worse, asking them to switch part way through!) isn’t necessary. I’m all for raising resilient kids, but we’ve already asked these kids to be resilient through a pandemic, which significantly disrupted their education and community. What are we trying to achieve through this exercise that’s worth the real impact it will have on kids? I’d prefer that public schools always prioritize the kids.
Also, any data being used to inform decisions isn’t reliable. This area is facing major changes through the ripple effects of downsizing the federal government and curbing immigration. The region needs to stabilize before we use data to make major and costly decisions.

Adjustments need to happen periodically. If it’s not your kid being moved now, it’s somebody else’s kids later. I personally would
have loved for this review to happen years ago, but it’s not about me (or you). Stop taking this personally.

But it IS personal, that’s my point.

Waiting for PP to identify which changes they think are necessary.

Lots of "we need a county-wide boundary study because there hasn't been one in 40 years," or vague statements about supporting a county-wide study without explaining why it's necessary.

Many things have changed over the past 40 years, and perhaps there was a reason why prior, more informed School Boards did not go down that path.

By itself, the fact that it's been 40 years since the last county-wide boundary study isn't compelling at all. It's like saying we need to reinstate Prohibition because it's been 92 years since the last one or admit another state to the Union because it's been 65 years since Hawaii was admitted as a state.

That's not to say boundaries shouldn't ever change. There are a couple of elementary schools with serious overcrowding - Coates and Parklawn. These situation deserve a boundary study, but that doesn't mean a lot of this other crap they are now rolling out is necessary (and, in fact, much of it appears to have been developed by someone playing with some software but with no real understanding of the county). Indeed, this larger study is now slowing down revisions to the Coates and Parklawn boundaries that might have been implmented earlier if they weren't being tied down by the larger review.

Regardless of whether changes are necessary, it is inappropriate to evaluate the wholist state of the situation on a regular basis. The fact that people object to that is incomprehensible. It’s like never looking at your bank statements let alone balancing your check books. Why don’t we just invest our retirement money, don’t make changes to it, and not look for 40 years.

This wins the prize for the most convoluted post of the day, and the competition isn’t even close.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe I am in the minority viewpoint, or it is just that people like me are not too concerned about all this because our houses are not close to a boundary.

You may think you are not close to a boundary, but that does not matter anymore. When I moved here, we were not close to a boundary. We haven't moved, but the boundaries have.
Elementary is safe for us because we are walkers. At least, I think it is safe. Middle school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary. High school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary.

When the boundaries were drawn, there were valid reasons for them. Traffic patterns, overcrowding at some schools, etc. With limited exceptions, that is not true with this boundary study.

This is kind of like going on vacation and having others come in to rearrange your furniture. They throw away what they think is not useful--but is important to you. And, yes, they also rearrange your kitchen so that you cannot find what you frequently use.

Did FCPS promise you that high school in perpetuity?

Did FCPS promise you an equity-based hand-out paid for by your neighbors?

Boundaries changes. All over the country, not just in Fairfax County.

Build a bridge and get over it.

“Get over it.” This is about real impact to real kids so no, I won’t just “get over it”. Since ES, my MS-aged kid has built connections to their zoned HS through sports, music, and academic activities. They visit the HS and know so many of the kids they’ll soon go to school with. Taking that away (and worse, asking them to switch part way through!) isn’t necessary. I’m all for raising resilient kids, but we’ve already asked these kids to be resilient through a pandemic, which significantly disrupted their education and community. What are we trying to achieve through this exercise that’s worth the real impact it will have on kids? I’d prefer that public schools always prioritize the kids.
Also, any data being used to inform decisions isn’t reliable. This area is facing major changes through the ripple effects of downsizing the federal government and curbing immigration. The region needs to stabilize before we use data to make major and costly decisions.

Adjustments need to happen periodically. If it’s not your kid being moved now, it’s somebody else’s kids later. I personally would
have loved for this review to happen years ago, but it’s not about me (or you). Stop taking this personally.

But it IS personal, that’s my point.

Waiting for PP to identify which changes they think are necessary.

Lots of "we need a county-wide boundary study because there hasn't been one in 40 years," or vague statements about supporting a county-wide study without explaining why it's necessary.

Many things have changed over the past 40 years, and perhaps there was a reason why prior, more informed School Boards did not go down that path.

By itself, the fact that it's been 40 years since the last county-wide boundary study isn't compelling at all. It's like saying we need to reinstate Prohibition because it's been 92 years since the last one or admit another state to the Union because it's been 65 years since Hawaii was admitted as a state.

That's not to say boundaries shouldn't ever change. There are a couple of elementary schools with serious overcrowding - Coates and Parklawn. These situation deserve a boundary study, but that doesn't mean a lot of this other crap they are now rolling out is necessary (and, in fact, much of it appears to have been developed by someone playing with some software but with no real understanding of the county). Indeed, this larger study is now slowing down revisions to the Coates and Parklawn boundaries that might have been implmented earlier if they weren't being tied down by the larger review.

Regardless of whether changes are necessary, it is inappropriate to evaluate the wholist state of the situation on a regular basis. The fact that people object to that is incomprehensible. It’s like never looking at your bank statements let alone balancing your check books. Why don’t we just invest our retirement money, don’t make changes to it, and not look for 40 years.

The Superintendent and School Board have paid $500,000 (so far) to a consultant. They have spent countless hours of personnel time working on this project and supporting a "community" committee, that is anything but balanced.

And, for what purpose? You think that a small group of professionals on staff could not have looked at this "wholisitcally?" Instead, they are spending countless funds on this project that will upset the already stressed communities.

For what? "They" say it is to save money--but they will just transfer the kids on the bus from one group to another.

Programm
atic equity? How about getting rid of IB? Never heard a word about that from our leaders--and it is the obvious solution.

Getting rid of islands? I'm not familiar with all of Fairfax County, but I see that they have just moved an island from one school to make it an island at another school. And, FWIW, they skipped one tiny--but ridiculous island and did not address it at all. (It's so small, they probably overlooked it.)

I suspect that split feeders will be even more troubling. I have read where people are happy to shift others out, as long as their own neighborhood gets to stay put.

What a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of the county has a house that is walkable to the trifecta of elementary middle and high school? Much less than 1%, right, if any?

Everyone else is just gambling on their house? Gtfo.

I summo but greater than 1%. We can walk to all three of ours. Terraset(?)-Hughes-SLHS are adjacent and walkable for many.

Can someone identify this poster’s logical fallacy/fallacies? There is definitely a name for it, I just can’t recall at the moment.

I think enough people have chimed in about walking distance.

I think it might be “confirmation bias”, but the funny thing is you can easily verify that a lot of the claimed trifecta walking areas are not really walkable to all three schools.

For instance, there may be a student who could hypothetically walk 1.25 miles on average to dranesville elementary or Herndon middle, but nobody closer, since the schools are 2.5 miles apart.

Turns out, there really are only few and far between areas, where you could live close enough to all 3 schools to be safe, and I don’t even think that is completely safe. I bet less than a thousand students fit into that category, perhaps far less.

The MFGA crowd is going to drive away our tax base with its us-vs-the supposed rich mentality. They might as well go support the orange Demi-God if they are going to advocate for short sighted boundary changes.

You’re so full of it. My kids are are at HES and have friends at Clearview and Dranesville. In middle school they and their friends regularly WALKED directly from HMS to friends’ house near Clearview and Dranesville. Sometimes just is they could grab a snack or a slice of pizza in the little business district. On the weekends they bike between all three areas. Their friend groups were not the only ones. Heck, they even bike to RTC. They visit friends at nearby pyramids now that they are in high school.

It is really strange that children will be irreparably harmed by moving to a neighboring school. It is really a wonder that any of them will be able to cope going to college or moving out of mom and dad’s home 🏡 one day.

Change the boundaries or don’t, but evaluate the situation every five to ten years. That should be non-negotiable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of the county has a house that is walkable to the trifecta of elementary middle and high school? Much less than 1%, right, if any?

Everyone else is just gambling on their house? Gtfo.

I summo but greater than 1%. We can walk to all three of ours. Terraset(?)-Hughes-SLHS are adjacent and walkable for many.

Can someone identify this poster’s logical fallacy/fallacies? There is definitely a name for it, I just can’t recall at the moment.

I think enough people have chimed in about walking distance.

I think it might be “confirmation bias”, but the funny thing is you can easily verify that a lot of the claimed trifecta walking areas are not really walkable to all three schools.

For instance, there may be a student who could hypothetically walk 1.25 miles on average to dranesville elementary or Herndon middle, but nobody closer, since the schools are 2.5 miles apart.

Turns out, there really are only few and far between areas, where you could live close enough to all 3 schools to be safe, and I don’t even think that is completely safe. I bet less than a thousand students fit into that category, perhaps far less.

The MFGA crowd is going to drive away our tax base with its us-vs-the supposed rich mentality. They might as well go support the orange Demi-God if they are going to advocate for short sighted boundary changes.

You’re so full of it. My kids are are at HES and have friends at Clearview and Dranesville. In middle school they and their friends regularly WALKED directly from HMS to friends’ house near Clearview and Dranesville. Sometimes just is they could grab a snack or a slice of pizza in the little business district. On the weekends they bike between all three areas. Their friend groups were not the only ones. Heck, they even bike to RTC. They visit friends at nearby pyramids now that they are in high school.

It is really strange that children will be irreparably harmed by moving to a neighboring school. It is really a wonder that any of them will be able to cope going to college or moving out of mom and dad’s home 🏡 one day.

Change the boundaries or don’t, but evaluate the situation every five to ten years. That should be non-negotiable.

Anyone with an I-phone can verify that it is 2.5 miles from Herndon Middle School to dranesville elementary. The MFGA crowd sure does love its funny math when it comes to distance.

Try to make your lies more believable.🤡

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Maybe I am in the minority viewpoint, or it is just that people like me are not too concerned about all this because our houses are not close to a boundary.

You may think you are not close to a boundary, but that does not matter anymore. When I moved here, we were not close to a boundary. We haven't moved, but the boundaries have.
Elementary is safe for us because we are walkers. At least, I think it is safe. Middle school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary. High school is very close--yet we are close to a boundary.

When the boundaries were drawn, there were valid reasons for them. Traffic patterns, overcrowding at some schools, etc. With limited exceptions, that is not true with this boundary study.

This is kind of like going on vacation and having others come in to rearrange your furniture. They throw away what they think is not useful--but is important to you. And, yes, they also rearrange your kitchen so that you cannot find what you frequently use.

Did FCPS promise you that high school in perpetuity?

Did FCPS promise you an equity-based hand-out paid for by your neighbors?

Boundaries changes. All over the country, not just in Fairfax County.

Build a bridge and get over it.

“Get over it.” This is about real impact to real kids so no, I won’t just “get over it”. Since ES, my MS-aged kid has built connections to their zoned HS through sports, music, and academic activities. They visit the HS and know so many of the kids they’ll soon go to school with. Taking that away (and worse, asking them to switch part way through!) isn’t necessary. I’m all for raising resilient kids, but we’ve already asked these kids to be resilient through a pandemic, which significantly disrupted their education and community. What are we trying to achieve through this exercise that’s worth the real impact it will have on kids? I’d prefer that public schools always prioritize the kids.
Also, any data being used to inform decisions isn’t reliable. This area is facing major changes through the ripple effects of downsizing the federal government and curbing immigration. The region needs to stabilize before we use data to make major and costly decisions.

Adjustments need to happen periodically. If it’s not your kid being moved now, it’s somebody else’s kids later. I personally would
have loved for this review to happen years ago, but it’s not about me (or you). Stop taking this personally.

But it IS personal, that’s my point.

Waiting for PP to identify which changes they think are necessary.

Lots of "we need a county-wide boundary study because there hasn't been one in 40 years," or vague statements about supporting a county-wide study without explaining why it's necessary.

Many things have changed over the past 40 years, and perhaps there was a reason why prior, more informed School Boards did not go down that path.

By itself, the fact that it's been 40 years since the last county-wide boundary study isn't compelling at all. It's like saying we need to reinstate Prohibition because it's been 92 years since the last one or admit another state to the Union because it's been 65 years since Hawaii was admitted as a state.

That's not to say boundaries shouldn't ever change. There are a couple of elementary schools with serious overcrowding - Coates and Parklawn. These situation deserve a boundary study, but that doesn't mean a lot of this other crap they are now rolling out is necessary (and, in fact, much of it appears to have been developed by someone playing with some software but with no real understanding of the county). Indeed, this larger study is now slowing down revisions to the Coates and Parklawn boundaries that might have been implmented earlier if they weren't being tied down by the larger review.

Regardless of whether changes are necessary, it is inappropriate to evaluate the wholist state of the situation on a regular basis. The fact that people object to that is incomprehensible. It’s like never looking at your bank statements let alone balancing your check books. Why don’t we just invest our retirement money, don’t make changes to it, and not look for 40 years.

You just inadvertently stumbled upon the 401k investing advice of Jack Bogle and Warren Buffett. Funny that you use that example as what not to do.

Also, I’m not sure SB shills should be bringing up bank accounts and money right now, because then people might remember that a prominent boundary change proponent on the school board named Kyle is being sued for embezzlement and allegedly went to strip clubs with other school board members on a taxpayer funded school board junket.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of the county has a house that is walkable to the trifecta of elementary middle and high school? Much less than 1%, right, if any?

Everyone else is just gambling on their house? Gtfo.

I summo but greater than 1%. We can walk to all three of ours. Terraset(?)-Hughes-SLHS are adjacent and walkable for many.

Can someone identify this poster’s logical fallacy/fallacies? There is definitely a name for it, I just can’t recall at the moment.

I think enough people have chimed in about walking distance.

I think it might be “confirmation bias”, but the funny thing is you can easily verify that a lot of the claimed trifecta walking areas are not really walkable to all three schools.

For instance, there may be a student who could hypothetically walk 1.25 miles on average to dranesville elementary or Herndon middle, but nobody closer, since the schools are 2.5 miles apart.

Turns out, there really are only few and far between areas, where you could live close enough to all 3 schools to be safe, and I don’t even think that is completely safe. I bet less than a thousand students fit into that category, perhaps far less.

The MFGA crowd is going to drive away our tax base with its us-vs-the supposed rich mentality. They might as well go support the orange Demi-God if they are going to advocate for short sighted boundary changes.

You’re so full of it. My kids are are at HES and have friends at Clearview and Dranesville. In middle school they and their friends regularly WALKED directly from HMS to friends’ house near Clearview and Dranesville. Sometimes just is they could grab a snack or a slice of pizza in the little business district. On the weekends they bike between all three areas. Their friend groups were not the only ones. Heck, they even bike to RTC. They visit friends at nearby pyramids now that they are in high school.

It is really strange that children will be irreparably harmed by moving to a neighboring school. It is really a wonder that any of them will be able to cope going to college or moving out of mom and dad’s home 🏡 one day.

Change the boundaries or don’t, but evaluate the situation every five to ten years. That should be non-negotiable.

Foolish me. I thought there was an annual capacity review tied to a rolling 5-year capital improvement plan. Why isn’t that enough? What are you trying to fix that can’t be fixed with studies and reviews flagged in the CIP like Parklawn and Coates? Wouldn’t that give families and communities stability and notice?

It sounds like you have a great community. What are you looking to adjust? If those Langley folks don’t want to join your community, who cares? You don’t need them, do you?

[Anonymous]

BTW, that last reply was from a DP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yay! It’s thesaurus day on DCUM!!

Anything to counteract the upcoming illogical boundary moves which are a bad solution to an undefined problem.

We still haven’t heard what problems we are actually solving, though we have heard that we are going to postpone solving some real problems because we want the changes to be comprehensive.

This thread is 200+ pages. You could start at the beginning if you cared about the issues supporters have raised, but you don’t, you just want to argue.

I’ve read it, thanks for the suggestion, but no one has told us what we’re actually solving.

I hear overcapacity and under capacity, but the thresholds seem to fluctuate to preserve farms (see, eg, Timber Lane attendance island).

I’ve heard nonsensical claims that transportation costs matter, but no analysis has been done to determine whether those costs will increase or decrease, and I’m guessing it’ll be a rubber stamp exercise at the end of the review.

I’ve heard equitable access, but no one has said what that means. The BRAC, the very committee that is meant to be coming up with the maps has pleaded with the school board and FCPS to provide a definition, but none has been provided. If that’s a big factor, why the heck not?

Thru’s attempts to fix attendance islands created way more issues than it solved.

So yeah, I’m still wondering, wtf are they actually trying to accomplish? You can wave your hands and pretend that it’s been explained, but I’m calling out the school board emperor having no clothes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What percentage of the county has a house that is walkable to the trifecta of elementary middle and high school? Much less than 1%, right, if any?

Everyone else is just gambling on their house? Gtfo.

I summo but greater than 1%. We can walk to all three of ours. Terraset(?)-Hughes-SLHS are adjacent and walkable for many.

Can someone identify this poster’s logical fallacy/fallacies? There is definitely a name for it, I just can’t recall at the moment.

I think enough people have chimed in about walking distance.

I think it might be “confirmation bias”, but the funny thing is you can easily verify that a lot of the claimed trifecta walking areas are not really walkable to all three schools.

For instance, there may be a student who could hypothetically walk 1.25 miles on average to dranesville elementary or Herndon middle, but nobody closer, since the schools are 2.5 miles apart.

Turns out, there really are only few and far between areas, where you could live close enough to all 3 schools to be safe, and I don’t even think that is completely safe. I bet less than a thousand students fit into that category, perhaps far less.

The MFGA crowd is going to drive away our tax base with its us-vs-the supposed rich mentality. They might as well go support the orange Demi-God if they are going to advocate for short sighted boundary changes.

You’re so full of it. My kids are are at HES and have friends at Clearview and Dranesville. In middle school they and their friends regularly WALKED directly from HMS to friends’ house near Clearview and Dranesville. Sometimes just is they could grab a snack or a slice of pizza in the little business district. On the weekends they bike between all three areas. Their friend groups were not the only ones. Heck, they even bike to RTC. They visit friends at nearby pyramids now that they are in high school.

It is really strange that children will be irreparably harmed by moving to a neighboring school. It is really a wonder that any of them will be able to cope going to college or moving out of mom and dad’s home 🏡 one day.

Change the boundaries or don’t, but evaluate the situation every five to ten years. That should be non-negotiable.

Foolish me. I thought there was an annual capacity review tied to a rolling 5-year capital improvement plan. Why isn’t that enough? What are you trying to fix that can’t be fixed with studies and reviews flagged in the CIP like Parklawn and Coates? Wouldn’t that give families and communities stability and notice?

It sounds like you have a great community. What are you looking to adjust? If those Langley folks don’t want to join your community, who cares? You don’t need them, do you?

The advantage of the targeted studies was that they addressed the situations where there was a serious need, yet students were grandfathered because we weren’t trying to do too many things at once.

Now we’re getting this total nonsense, where some consultants who clearly don’t know the county play around with a software tool to generate boundary changes that will be highly disruptive, have minimal benefits in most cases, and are large enough in scale that grandfathering will be virtually impossible.

But it’s not fair to blame the consultants when the real blame lies with the current school board, which is totally lacking in anything approaching common sense or any sense of restraint or humility.