FCPS HS Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kyle McDaniel and Mateo Dunne both seem to be big fans of the “holistic review.” McDaniel lives in the Oakton district, and Oakton just got an enormous renovation and a big addition. Dunne lives in the West Potomac district, and West Potomac also just got a big addition outside the renovation queue.

It’s going to seem a tad hypocritical if they now turn around and tell others they should just expect to be redistricted pursuant to a “holistic review” if their schools are overcrowded, regardless of whether people at those schools are even asking for a boundary change, after their own schools have been generously expanded.

It would only be hypocritical if they pushed for those expansions.

It's hypocritical if they stand to benefit from expansions to which they never objected, yet now propose to treat others differently.

They weren't on the board when then expansions occurred. Dunne's constituents will probably be the angriest about a holistic review because any move of a Ft Hunt ES to the Whitman/MVHS pyramid would pull Sandburg and West Po above the 40% farms rate threshold.

What was the point of the Democrats getting taxpayers to fund an expansion of West Potomac if they are now going to turn around and send kids to Mount Vernon?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kyle McDaniel and Mateo Dunne both seem to be big fans of the “holistic review.” McDaniel lives in the Oakton district, and Oakton just got an enormous renovation and a big addition. Dunne lives in the West Potomac district, and West Potomac also just got a big addition outside the renovation queue.

It’s going to seem a tad hypocritical if they now turn around and tell others they should just expect to be redistricted pursuant to a “holistic review” if their schools are overcrowded, regardless of whether people at those schools are even asking for a boundary change, after their own schools have been generously expanded.

It would only be hypocritical if they pushed for those expansions.

It's hypocritical if they stand to benefit from expansions to which they never objected, yet now propose to treat others differently.

My kids schoolw as recently renovated. I would guess that a boundary adjustment would cause him to move to a different school that hasn't been renovated. I am fine with that. I didn't ask for the renovation at his building, I have been voting against most of the renovations because they are expanding schools when there are school that are underenrolled. They are going to rebuild a closed school that is not needed. It is a waste of money.

Renovate the schools that need renovation. Don't expand schools when there are schools with space. Boundaries should be reassessed on a regular basis to make the most efficient use of space. FCPS has not completed a boundary reassessment in ages and it needs to be done.

It’s been explained several times before that the most efficient time to add capacity is when a school is already being renovated. You can ignore this, but it’s simply true.

And boundaries should only be changed when there is a truly compelling need to do so, and not simply because someone has decided there needs to be a county-wide study.

The disparities among high schools, in particular, when it comes to capacity and facilities is a disgrace, and they’d gain more supporters if they developed a plan to address that, rather than make vague statements about shifting all the boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should be updating the renovation queue, not monkeying with the projections and then threatening boundary changes that very few want.

Threatening? A healthy organization checks status more often than every 50 years.

They are perfectly capable of adjusting boundaries when there is a compelling need.

People are complaining some schools are overcrowded. How is that not a compelling need to rebalance the boundaries?

Exactly. Whenever anyone complains to me, I always make sure they get exactly what they want.

Kids complain that they want a cookie, bam, compelling enough for me.

So when the Facilities Planning Advisory Council, consultants, and real communities recommend ideas for appropriate boundary adjustments but a vocal minority complains about it, guess it's fair to move foward then.

Apart from Glasgow, what other “real community” has advocated in any significant numbers for boundary adjustments recently and not been heard?

I would argue that the Shrevewood community was not heard. It argued for a boundary adjustment that would balance out the population at Shrevewood, Stenwood, Freedom Hill and maybe another ES. Instead, we are getting the unwanted Dunn Loring school. There is already capacity in nearby ES that could have handled the adjustment. I don't believe anyone at Shrevewood asked for a new ES.

Fair point, but you will get the boundary adjustment eventually. It will just be later and far more disruptive than necessary.

If they shelved the Dunn Loring school, and used that money more wisely, they’d have more credibility. Moving ahead with an unnecessary new school with suggestions they are also going to change other boundaries that no one is asking to be changed is the worst of all worlds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kyle McDaniel and Mateo Dunne both seem to be big fans of the “holistic review.” McDaniel lives in the Oakton district, and Oakton just got an enormous renovation and a big addition. Dunne lives in the West Potomac district, and West Potomac also just got a big addition outside the renovation queue.

It’s going to seem a tad hypocritical if they now turn around and tell others they should just expect to be redistricted pursuant to a “holistic review” if their schools are overcrowded, regardless of whether people at those schools are even asking for a boundary change, after their own schools have been generously expanded.

It would only be hypocritical if they pushed for those expansions.

It's hypocritical if they stand to benefit from expansions to which they never objected, yet now propose to treat others differently.

My kids schoolw as recently renovated. I would guess that a boundary adjustment would cause him to move to a different school that hasn't been renovated. I am fine with that. I didn't ask for the renovation at his building, I have been voting against most of the renovations because they are expanding schools when there are school that are underenrolled. They are going to rebuild a closed school that is not needed. It is a waste of money.

Renovate the schools that need renovation. Don't expand schools when there are schools with space. Boundaries should be reassessed on a regular basis to make the most efficient use of space. FCPS has not completed a boundary reassessment in ages and it needs to be done.

Are you willing to share your current school pyramid and projected realigned school pyramid? I’m guessing that you’d be trading up, which is why you are advocating for redistricting.

South Lakes. We would move to Herndon. I doubt that we would move to any of the other schools in the area because they are over crowded and would be shifting kids to other schools. Both schools have been recently renovated but that is the least of my priorities for HS. I am looking at available classes and experiences for my kid. The big change for us would be IB to AP, and I am not opposed to that. Herndon is a lower performing school the South Lakes.

I am not worried about it because I know plenty of parents who have had good experiences at Herndon. I know that we are involved parents who will be keeping an eye on our kids experience. I know that he will be in the IB/AP program at whatever school he lands at, which means he will be fine. It South Lakes and Herndon that essentially means he will be in a school within a school. I doubt that the school board will make any real changes to anything because parents at McLean and Langley and whosever would land at Liberty or Mt Vernon or other HS will throw a hissy fit and block whatever changes are recommended.

You claimed previously that your kid might be moved to an unrenovated school, but Herndon was just renovated. Very nicely, too.

In any event, given the money already poured into South Lakes to expand that school, you’re happy to say you’re willing to be redistricted when you know it’s really others more likely to get moved if they actually start redrawing boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kyle McDaniel and Mateo Dunne both seem to be big fans of the “holistic review.” McDaniel lives in the Oakton district, and Oakton just got an enormous renovation and a big addition. Dunne lives in the West Potomac district, and West Potomac also just got a big addition outside the renovation queue.

It’s going to seem a tad hypocritical if they now turn around and tell others they should just expect to be redistricted pursuant to a “holistic review” if their schools are overcrowded, regardless of whether people at those schools are even asking for a boundary change, after their own schools have been generously expanded.

It would only be hypocritical if they pushed for those expansions.

It's hypocritical if they stand to benefit from expansions to which they never objected, yet now propose to treat others differently.

My kids schoolw as recently renovated. I would guess that a boundary adjustment would cause him to move to a different school that hasn't been renovated. I am fine with that. I didn't ask for the renovation at his building, I have been voting against most of the renovations because they are expanding schools when there are school that are underenrolled. They are going to rebuild a closed school that is not needed. It is a waste of money.

Renovate the schools that need renovation. Don't expand schools when there are schools with space. Boundaries should be reassessed on a regular basis to make the most efficient use of space. FCPS has not completed a boundary reassessment in ages and it needs to be done.

Are you willing to share your current school pyramid and projected realigned school pyramid? I’m guessing that you’d be trading up, which is why you are advocating for redistricting.

South Lakes. We would move to Herndon. I doubt that we would move to any of the other schools in the area because they are over crowded and would be shifting kids to other schools. Both schools have been recently renovated but that is the least of my priorities for HS. I am looking at available classes and experiences for my kid. The big change for us would be IB to AP, and I am not opposed to that. Herndon is a lower performing school the South Lakes.

I am not worried about it because I know plenty of parents who have had good experiences at Herndon. I know that we are involved parents who will be keeping an eye on our kids experience. I know that he will be in the IB/AP program at whatever school he lands at, which means he will be fine. It South Lakes and Herndon that essentially means he will be in a school within a school. I doubt that the school board will make any real changes to anything because parents at McLean and Langley and whosever would land at Liberty or Mt Vernon or other HS will throw a hissy fit and block whatever changes are recommended.

You claimed previously that your kid might be moved to an unrenovated school, but Herndon was just renovated. Very nicely, too.

In any event, given the money already poured into South Lakes to expand that school, you’re happy to say you’re willing to be redistricted when you know it’s really others more likely to get moved if they actually start redrawing boundaries.

Would you be happy if McLean was renovated but not expanded and kids were shifted to schools with open seats? I know the answer, the answer is no because you only care about maintaining the status quo because you are worried abut shifting to a school with lower test scores.

I don't care that it is cheaper to expand why renovating. Not expanding is less expensive then expanding during renovations. There are open seats, a good number of open seats, available in the county. Regular boundary reviews would allow us to use those seats, then we would not have to pay to expand schools. Adjusting boundaries to make use of open seats is less expensive then building expansions, even if it is less expensive to build an expansion when renovating.

The only outcome you want is for your school to be renovated, which it needs, and expanded, which it doesn't need. There are schools that have open seats that you don't want to move to, Herndon and Langley. Herndon you don't want to move to because the test scores are far lower. I have no clue why people resist moving to Langley, it has high test scores and was recently renovated. I say I am fine with moving to a school with lower test scores and your respose implies that all I care about is that the school has been renovated. I don't. I would be fine moving to Chantilly or Oak Hill. But then your reply is that I am fine with that because they have better test scores.

My child will be fine at any school in FCPS because I am an involved parent and he will end up in the AP/IB track. At the higher performing schools that means he is a part of the entire school and that is great. At the lower performing schools, that means he ends up in the school in the school scenario. It is less ideal but he will be fine academically and probably have better college results.

Yuo don't want a solution that benefits everyone, you want your cake and to eat it to. And you will probably get your way because the higher SES parents that are petrified of change are very good at throwing public tantrums due to having more resources to spare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kyle McDaniel and Mateo Dunne both seem to be big fans of the “holistic review.” McDaniel lives in the Oakton district, and Oakton just got an enormous renovation and a big addition. Dunne lives in the West Potomac district, and West Potomac also just got a big addition outside the renovation queue.

It’s going to seem a tad hypocritical if they now turn around and tell others they should just expect to be redistricted pursuant to a “holistic review” if their schools are overcrowded, regardless of whether people at those schools are even asking for a boundary change, after their own schools have been generously expanded.

It would only be hypocritical if they pushed for those expansions.

It's hypocritical if they stand to benefit from expansions to which they never objected, yet now propose to treat others differently.

My kids schoolw as recently renovated. I would guess that a boundary adjustment would cause him to move to a different school that hasn't been renovated. I am fine with that. I didn't ask for the renovation at his building, I have been voting against most of the renovations because they are expanding schools when there are school that are underenrolled. They are going to rebuild a closed school that is not needed. It is a waste of money.

Renovate the schools that need renovation. Don't expand schools when there are schools with space. Boundaries should be reassessed on a regular basis to make the most efficient use of space. FCPS has not completed a boundary reassessment in ages and it needs to be done.

Are you willing to share your current school pyramid and projected realigned school pyramid? I’m guessing that you’d be trading up, which is why you are advocating for redistricting.

South Lakes. We would move to Herndon. I doubt that we would move to any of the other schools in the area because they are over crowded and would be shifting kids to other schools. Both schools have been recently renovated but that is the least of my priorities for HS. I am looking at available classes and experiences for my kid. The big change for us would be IB to AP, and I am not opposed to that. Herndon is a lower performing school the South Lakes.

I am not worried about it because I know plenty of parents who have had good experiences at Herndon. I know that we are involved parents who will be keeping an eye on our kids experience. I know that he will be in the IB/AP program at whatever school he lands at, which means he will be fine. It South Lakes and Herndon that essentially means he will be in a school within a school. I doubt that the school board will make any real changes to anything because parents at McLean and Langley and whosever would land at Liberty or Mt Vernon or other HS will throw a hissy fit and block whatever changes are recommended.

You claimed previously that your kid might be moved to an unrenovated school, but Herndon was just renovated. Very nicely, too.

In any event, given the money already poured into South Lakes to expand that school, you’re happy to say you’re willing to be redistricted when you know it’s really others more likely to get moved if they actually start redrawing boundaries.

Would you be happy if McLean was renovated but not expanded and kids were shifted to schools with open seats? I know the answer, the answer is no because you only care about maintaining the status quo because you are worried abut shifting to a school with lower test scores.

I don't care that it is cheaper to expand why renovating. Not expanding is less expensive then expanding during renovations. There are open seats, a good number of open seats, available in the county. Regular boundary reviews would allow us to use those seats, then we would not have to pay to expand schools. Adjusting boundaries to make use of open seats is less expensive then building expansions, even if it is less expensive to build an expansion when renovating.

The only outcome you want is for your school to be renovated, which it needs, and expanded, which it doesn't need. There are schools that have open seats that you don't want to move to, Herndon and Langley. Herndon you don't want to move to because the test scores are far lower. I have no clue why people resist moving to Langley, it has high test scores and was recently renovated. I say I am fine with moving to a school with lower test scores and your respose implies that all I care about is that the school has been renovated. I don't. I would be fine moving to Chantilly or Oak Hill. But then your reply is that I am fine with that because they have better test scores.

My child will be fine at any school in FCPS because I am an involved parent and he will end up in the AP/IB track. At the higher performing schools that means he is a part of the entire school and that is great. At the lower performing schools, that means he ends up in the school in the school scenario. It is less ideal but he will be fine academically and probably have better college results.

Yuo don't want a solution that benefits everyone, you want your cake and to eat it to. And you will probably get your way because the higher SES parents that are petrified of change are very good at throwing public tantrums due to having more resources to spare.

First, McLean deserves to be treated fairly when it comes to facilities, which includes both the condition and the capacity of the school, yet people like you constantly try to recast equitable treatment as preferential treatment. At some point, the renovation queue will be updated, and we'd reasonably expect to be fairly high up on the next queue.

Second, there's no group of any size at McLean asking for a boundary change now, so why are you trying so hard to foist one on that school in particular?

Third, if the McLean boundaries were to change yet again (after the boundary change just a few years ago), the most likely next change would be with Falls Church, not Langley, which is projected to get closer to full capacity over the next five years, or Herndon, whose boundaries are nowhere near the McLean attendance area.

The fact that some of the new School Board members may have as little understanding of the facts as you do is precisely why I'd rather not see them undertake some "holistic" review that could end up being a total sh*t-show.

[Anonymous]

It's funny that PP seems to take issue with what she sees as unnecessary expansions at some schools but thinks the same people who brought us unnecessary expansions can pull off county-wide boundary changes successfully.

No thanks.

[Anonymous]

Well let's see, who's sitting pretty right now with recent renovations? Langley, Oakton, Madison, West Springfield, Cooper, Frost, Rocky Run. Quite a privileged set of schools. So yes I can see why this crowd would be against boundary changes that could send them to an older facility that won't see a renovation for another couple of decades after the new queue comes out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well let's see, who's sitting pretty right now with recent renovations? Langley, Oakton, Madison, West Springfield, Cooper, Frost, Rocky Run. Quite a privileged set of schools. So yes I can see why this crowd would be against boundary changes that could send them to an older facility that won't see a renovation for another couple of decades after the new queue comes out.

Herndon and Marshall also got renovated and Falls Church is getting a very expensive renovation now.

Madison wasn't renovated; it got an addition outside the renovation queue - as did Justice, West Potomac, and South Lakes - but the rest of the school wasn't renovated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kyle McDaniel and Mateo Dunne both seem to be big fans of the “holistic review.” McDaniel lives in the Oakton district, and Oakton just got an enormous renovation and a big addition. Dunne lives in the West Potomac district, and West Potomac also just got a big addition outside the renovation queue.

It’s going to seem a tad hypocritical if they now turn around and tell others they should just expect to be redistricted pursuant to a “holistic review” if their schools are overcrowded, regardless of whether people at those schools are even asking for a boundary change, after their own schools have been generously expanded.

It would only be hypocritical if they pushed for those expansions.

It's hypocritical if they stand to benefit from expansions to which they never objected, yet now propose to treat others differently.

They weren't on the board when then expansions occurred. Dunne's constituents will probably be the angriest about a holistic review because any move of a Ft Hunt ES to the Whitman/MVHS pyramid would pull Sandburg and West Po above the 40% farms rate threshold.

What was the point of the Democrats getting taxpayers to fund an expansion of West Potomac if they are now going to turn around and send kids to Mount Vernon?

West Potomac should not have been expanded, they should have shifted the boundaries so that kids used the space available at Mount Vernon. I am guesing that didn't happen because the school board was too cowardly to shift the boundaries and use the available space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well let's see, who's sitting pretty right now with recent renovations? Langley, Oakton, Madison, West Springfield, Cooper, Frost, Rocky Run. Quite a privileged set of schools. So yes I can see why this crowd would be against boundary changes that could send them to an older facility that won't see a renovation for another couple of decades after the new queue comes out.

Herndon's expansion cost twice what Langley's cost. Not wanting to get rezoned to Herndon has nothing to do with the renovation status of either school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well let's see, who's sitting pretty right now with recent renovations? Langley, Oakton, Madison, West Springfield, Cooper, Frost, Rocky Run. Quite a privileged set of schools. So yes I can see why this crowd would be against boundary changes that could send them to an older facility that won't see a renovation for another couple of decades after the new queue comes out.

Herndon's expansion cost twice what Langley's cost. Not wanting to get rezoned to Herndon has nothing to do with the renovation status of either school.

Most of that difference is inflation of building cost and not discrepancy in quality. Langley still got a state of the art facility. Centreville is already forecasted at 150% of Herndon but I'm sure by the time it's all said and done it will end up well over twice the cost of Herndon.

We're rapidly approaching the half billion mark per HS renovation and that is not sustainable. These last few schools to get one are going to be the last ones for a long time as I suspect they will begin to lengthen the time between expensive renovations with the new queue and address capacity with holistic boundary review.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well let's see, who's sitting pretty right now with recent renovations? Langley, Oakton, Madison, West Springfield, Cooper, Frost, Rocky Run. Quite a privileged set of schools. So yes I can see why this crowd would be against boundary changes that could send them to an older facility that won't see a renovation for another couple of decades after the new queue comes out.

Herndon's expansion cost twice what Langley's cost. Not wanting to get rezoned to Herndon has nothing to do with the renovation status of either school.

Most of that difference is inflation of building cost and not discrepancy in quality. Langley still got a state of the art facility. Centreville is already forecasted at 150% of Herndon but I'm sure by the time it's all said and done it will end up well over twice the cost of Herndon.

We're rapidly approaching the half billion mark per HS renovation and that is not sustainable. These last few schools to get one are going to be the last ones for a long time as I suspect they will begin to lengthen the time between expensive renovations with the new queue and address capacity with holistic boundary review.

More than a little bit of hyperbole there.

If they want an even halfway decent school system, they can't ignore the fact that some schools have state-of-the-art facilities and others do not. Changing boundaries shuffles kids around but is no substitute for a long-term plan to ensure every school has adequate facilities, which also includes adequate capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They should be updating the renovation queue, not monkeying with the projections and then threatening boundary changes that very few want.

Threatening? A healthy organization checks status more often than every 50 years.

They are perfectly capable of adjusting boundaries when there is a compelling need.

People are complaining some schools are overcrowded. How is that not a compelling need to rebalance the boundaries?

Exactly. Whenever anyone complains to me, I always make sure they get exactly what they want.

Kids complain that they want a cookie, bam, compelling enough for me.

So when the Facilities Planning Advisory Council, consultants, and real communities recommend ideas for appropriate boundary adjustments but a vocal minority complains about it, guess it's fair to move foward then.

Apart from Glasgow, what other “real community” has advocated in any significant numbers for boundary adjustments recently and not been heard?

I would argue that the Shrevewood community was not heard. It argued for a boundary adjustment that would balance out the population at Shrevewood, Stenwood, Freedom Hill and maybe another ES. Instead, we are getting the unwanted Dunn Loring school. There is already capacity in nearby ES that could have handled the adjustment. I don't believe anyone at Shrevewood asked for a new ES.

Fair point, but you will get the boundary adjustment eventually. It will just be later and far more disruptive than necessary.

If they shelved the Dunn Loring school, and used that money more wisely, they’d have more credibility. Moving ahead with an unnecessary new school with suggestions they are also going to change other boundaries that no one is asking to be changed is the worst of all worlds.

This is what most of the voters chose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well let's see, who's sitting pretty right now with recent renovations? Langley, Oakton, Madison, West Springfield, Cooper, Frost, Rocky Run. Quite a privileged set of schools. So yes I can see why this crowd would be against boundary changes that could send them to an older facility that won't see a renovation for another couple of decades after the new queue comes out.

Herndon's expansion cost twice what Langley's cost. Not wanting to get rezoned to Herndon has nothing to do with the renovation status of either school.

Most of that difference is inflation of building cost and not discrepancy in quality. Langley still got a state of the art facility. Centreville is already forecasted at 150% of Herndon but I'm sure by the time it's all said and done it will end up well over twice the cost of Herndon.

We're rapidly approaching the half billion mark per HS renovation and that is not sustainable. These last few schools to get one are going to be the last ones for a long time as I suspect they will begin to lengthen the time between expensive renovations with the new queue and address capacity with holistic boundary review.

More than a little bit of hyperbole there.

If they want an even halfway decent school system, they can't ignore the fact that some schools have state-of-the-art facilities and others do not. Changing boundaries shuffles kids around but is no substitute for a long-term plan to ensure every school has adequate facilities, which also includes adequate capacity.

What gives you that idea?