School Board Forum on "Boundary and Capacity"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While they’re at school boundaries, could they also look at district boundaries? Why should Langley and McLean be in the same district as Herndon? Herndon is more aligned with SLHS and Chantilly. Langley and McLean should really be in a district by themselves.

FCPS has Herndon and Langley in the same region (Region 1) and McLean in a different region (Region 2).

All three are in the same magisterial district (Dranesville), but FCPS has no role in deciding what the boundaries of the magisterial districts should be. The Board of Supervisors tinkered with the magisterial districts a couple of years ago after the results of the 2020 census came out to make sure all the magisterial districts had more or less the same number of residents, but there weren't any changes, or any significant changes, to the Dranesville District. The most significant changes were to the Springfield District.

Langley should be in region 2 with McLean, FC, and maybe Justice though Justice already gets enough of the shaft too. Keep Langley and Herndon separated as much as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

DP love how you attribute every motive to social engineering. SMH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

Honest question - do you think "social engineering" means anything that might run counter to the wishes of a Langley family? Because there may be valid reasons to move kids in and out of Langley at some point that bear no resemblance to what "social engineering" generally is understood to connote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was clear from the time that Tholen scrubbed her campaign website of any favorable references to “One Fairfax” that she would do what her Great Falls neighbors wanted. And she did, for the most part.

Anyway with so much growth in Tysons and nearby areas they may need to move more kids to Langley at some point and the difference now is that Herndon has more space if they need to move kids there.

Nope the assertion back then was that she changed her website to get elected and that once in, she would be all in on the “comprehend review of the boundaries.”

Didn’t happen.

It could be, just might be that the boundaries didn’t need a massive overhaul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was clear from the time that Tholen scrubbed her campaign website of any favorable references to “One Fairfax” that she would do what her Great Falls neighbors wanted. And she did, for the most part.

Anyway with so much growth in Tysons and nearby areas they may need to move more kids to Langley at some point and the difference now is that Herndon has more space if they need to move kids there.

Nope the assertion back then was that she changed her website to get elected and that once in, she would be all in on the “comprehend review of the boundaries.”

Didn’t happen.

It could be, just might be that the boundaries didn’t need a massive overhaul.

You’re just making stuff up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While they’re at school boundaries, could they also look at district boundaries? Why should Langley and McLean be in the same district as Herndon? Herndon is more aligned with SLHS and Chantilly. Langley and McLean should really be in a district by themselves.

Do you mean pyramids? Langley and McLean are in different pyramids.

No I mean districts. McLean, Langley and Herndon all belong to the Dranesville District. And theoretically, they have a representative that looks out for all of them.

I do believe every district has a “representative who looks out for” the schools in that district. Not sure what your point is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

DP. I’m the poster the PP was agreeing with. It’s interesting you bring up sock puppeting, because either there is one unhinged poster constantly obsessing over Langley, or you all sound EXACTLY the same. Which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

DP love how you attribute every motive to social engineering. SMH.

Another DP. What should we call it when posters are frothing at the mouth to change the boundaries of schools their children *don’t even attend*? I have no opinion - none at all - on schools my own kids don’t attend. Why do you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

Honest question - do you think "social engineering" means anything that might run counter to the wishes of a Langley family? Because there may be valid reasons to move kids in and out of Langley at some point that bear no resemblance to what "social engineering" generally is understood to connote.

Perhaps, but her posts are of one flavor - to soak the “rich” Forestville families. She’s got a real chip on her shoulder about it, especially since, as the board member recently pointed out, redistricting is bad for all involved, especially poor students. Her hatred of Forestville is just that great, that she’d be willing to hurt Herndon students to stick it to Forestville.

I am in favor of doing everything we can to improve schools, but it really feels like a paternalistic “savior” move to do what she advocates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

Honest question - do you think "social engineering" means anything that might run counter to the wishes of a Langley family? Because there may be valid reasons to move kids in and out of Langley at some point that bear no resemblance to what "social engineering" generally is understood to connote.

Perhaps, but her posts are of one flavor - to soak the “rich” Forestville families. She’s got a real chip on her shoulder about it, especially since, as the board member recently pointed out, redistricting is bad for all involved, especially poor students. Her hatred of Forestville is just that great, that she’d be willing to hurt Herndon students to stick it to Forestville.

I am in favor of doing everything we can to improve schools, but it really feels like a paternalistic “savior” move to do what she advocates.

DP. Completely agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

Honest question - do you think "social engineering" means anything that might run counter to the wishes of a Langley family? Because there may be valid reasons to move kids in and out of Langley at some point that bear no resemblance to what "social engineering" generally is understood to connote.

Perhaps, but her posts are of one flavor - to soak the “rich” Forestville families. She’s got a real chip on her shoulder about it, especially since, as the board member recently pointed out, redistricting is bad for all involved, especially poor students. Her hatred of Forestville is just that great, that she’d be willing to hurt Herndon students to stick it to Forestville.

I am in favor of doing everything we can to improve schools, but it really feels like a paternalistic “savior” move to do what she advocates.

Except multiple posters have said Forestville should only move if there’s a compelling logistical need to move it and you keep claiming we’re all the same poster with a “social engineering” agenda. It’s just very odd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

Honest question - do you think "social engineering" means anything that might run counter to the wishes of a Langley family? Because there may be valid reasons to move kids in and out of Langley at some point that bear no resemblance to what "social engineering" generally is understood to connote.

Perhaps, but her posts are of one flavor - to soak the “rich” Forestville families. She’s got a real chip on her shoulder about it, especially since, as the board member recently pointed out, redistricting is bad for all involved, especially poor students. Her hatred of Forestville is just that great, that she’d be willing to hurt Herndon students to stick it to Forestville.

I am in favor of doing everything we can to improve schools, but it really feels like a paternalistic “savior” move to do what she advocates.

Except multiple posters have said Forestville should only move if there’s a compelling logistical need to move it and you keep claiming we’re all the same poster with a “social engineering” agenda. It’s just very odd.

But there isn’t anywhere close to a compelling logistical need, so that really falls flat. And it isn’t multiple posters, it’s just you. The other advocate is just clearly out for Forestville. So it’s you two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will the Langley bastion finally fall? I hope so. Rooting for this board.

Bitter much?

Gatehouse should make the best use of facilities, giving weight to efficiency and budget.
If the Langley boundaries change due to that then whatever.

The Langley boundaries may well need to change in a few years based on capacity and logistical issues, but if that happens they'll still claim it's being done to "punish" them. Hopefully with Robyn Lady representing the district rather than Elaine Tholen, decisions will be based on the merits and not just a desire to place Langley's interests over everyone else's.

“still?”
Where/when did Langley parents protest possible boundary changes with the argument that the school board wanted to punish them for something?

As to hoping the latest Dranesville rep will advocate for boundaries based on the merits of different options (which will apparently be demonstrated only if she wants to alter boundaries in a way that you desire)
—- I am old enough to remember all the crowing about Jane Strauss not being around to “protect” the Langley boundaries anymore after Elaine was elected, and we see how that worked out for people emotionally invested in some drastic change.

+100
There is no rational discussion to be had with the PP, who continues to rant about schools which her children don’t even attend. Interesting how she’ll never disclose where her kids actually do go to school.

+1. Her social engineering crusade is truly pathetic at this point. She is likely as insufferable in real life as she is on this forum.

Are you sock puppeting or do all these Langley posters sound EXACTLY the same?

I mean people will point out that changes should only be made, if at all, if needed based on capacity and logistics, and you'll still flail away about "social engineering."

Report the post and claim it’s a sock puppet post. It’s not, but you can see for yourself that I’m a DP when the admin doesn’t remove it. On the other hand, I’m quite certain that you are a one woman social engineering crusader.

Honest question - do you think "social engineering" means anything that might run counter to the wishes of a Langley family? Because there may be valid reasons to move kids in and out of Langley at some point that bear no resemblance to what "social engineering" generally is understood to connote.

Perhaps, but her posts are of one flavor - to soak the “rich” Forestville families. She’s got a real chip on her shoulder about it, especially since, as the board member recently pointed out, redistricting is bad for all involved, especially poor students. Her hatred of Forestville is just that great, that she’d be willing to hurt Herndon students to stick it to Forestville.

I am in favor of doing everything we can to improve schools, but it really feels like a paternalistic “savior” move to do what she advocates.

Except multiple posters have said Forestville should only move if there’s a compelling logistical need to move it and you keep claiming we’re all the same poster with a “social engineering” agenda. It’s just very odd.

But there isn’t anywhere close to a compelling logistical need, so that really falls flat. And it isn’t multiple posters, it’s just you. The other advocate is just clearly out for Forestville. So it’s you two.

Oh, so now there are two posters, not one. Keep increasing the tally and eventually you’ll get closer to the actual number.