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."

You are assuming that none of the posters stating that capacity and logistical considerations may necessitate changing the Langley boundary live in that pyramid, and you are wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The grocery stores have large bags of ice.
Pick one up to soothe your butthurt.

[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:

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.

Hate to tell you, but this isn’t really a cause with a huge following. The people who are zealots are the ones that are culture warriors/social engineers/Forestville haters. Those on the other side have a large personal stake in it.

If you are truly a dispassionate observer, then I’d suggest a more fulfilling hobby than perusing internet message board threads that don’t concern you.

[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.

Any suggestion that has a whiff of possibly affecting certain schools in certain ways is labeled social engineering around here — even before the renovations over the past few years occurred. It is sad. Just wait until next year when standards based grading is applied to all schools.

[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.

Any suggestion that has a whiff of possibly affecting certain schools in certain ways is labeled social engineering around here — even before the renovations over the past few years occurred. It is sad. Just wait until next year when standards based grading is applied to all schools.

What’s sad about it? Parents should advocate for their kids. I’d take that any day of the week over someone who wants to upend the apple cart based on some vague misguided sense of social justice.

And deep down most people on this board know they would feel the exact same way if it were their kids’ educations on the line.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The grocery stores have large bags of ice.
Pick one up to soothe your butthurt.

That’s funny because the biggest butthurt on the forum is Langley posters getting so worked up whenever the mere possibility that their school might be part of a future boundary discussion is mentioned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Karl Frisch is claiming that the School Board shouldn’t make “one-off” decisions about boundaries or school expansions because they are politicians, yet he single-handedly is going to force boundary adjustments for most of the elementary schools within the Marshall pyramid in a few years by pushing through the Dunn Loring ES project, which based on staff’s prior analysis was on the back burner and not at all a priority before Frisch decided to accelerate it.

Why they are doing now will just be used as an excuse for not dealing with long-overcrowded and/or neglected schools. These people suck.

Karl Frisch shouldn't even be allowed on the school board. Having children in the system should be a requirement for being elected to the school board, and having children in the system should be a requirement for voting for the school board. Why are we allowing people without any skin in the game to make decisions about our kid's education?

So you sincerely believe the following people should not have a say at all?

1. Arthur, whose kids are FCPS alumni. Arthur believes that strong schools build a strong community, and therefore, he has a vested interest in what happens in the community schools.

2. Beatrice, a retired teacher who lives in the community in which she taught for 35 years.

3. Carlos, a current FCPS teacher who has 15+ years of experience in education

4. Dania, a young woman who doesn't yet have children, but who hopes to have them within the next couple years.

5. Elliot, a professor of educational policy who lives in Fairfax County.

6. Farrah, a recent graduate of FCPS who has strong feelings about the state of our schools.

ANYONE who cares about our community should care about our public schools. They all have a right to vote, run for office (yes, even for school board!), and voice their opinions.

Saying you should have to have children in the system in order to run for SB or to vote is gross discrimination and is voter suppression. Think about how that would sound if you replaced your qualifier (about having school-age children) with a different one, such as gender, sex, religion, skin color, difference in ability, etc. Think about that. Just think. I hope you are ashamed of yourself!

[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.

Any suggestion that has a whiff of possibly affecting certain schools in certain ways is labeled social engineering around here — even before the renovations over the past few years occurred. It is sad. Just wait until next year when standards based grading is applied to all schools.

Agreed. It’s like some posters are only capable of a knee-jerk reaction or aren’t very familiar with the English language. If anything potentially interferes with their expectations, it’s “social engineering.”

[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:

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.

Any suggestion that has a whiff of possibly affecting certain schools in certain ways is labeled social engineering around here — even before the renovations over the past few years occurred. It is sad. Just wait until next year when standards based grading is applied to all schools.

What’s sad about it? Parents should advocate for their kids. I’d take that any day of the week over someone who wants to upend the apple cart based on some vague misguided sense of social justice.

And deep down most people on this board know they would feel the exact same way if it were their kids’ educations on the line.

Whoa. That is quite the accusation about another FCPS school. You should see your therapist. That is next level overreacting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So you sincerely believe the following people should not have a say at all?

1. Arthur, whose kids are FCPS alumni. Arthur believes that strong schools build a strong community, and therefore, he has a vested interest in what happens in the community schools.
2. Beatrice, a retired teacher who lives in the community in which she taught for 35 years.
3. Carlos, a current FCPS teacher who has 15+ years of experience in education
4. Dania, a young woman who doesn't yet have children, but who hopes to have them within the next couple years.
5. Elliot, a professor of educational policy who lives in Fairfax County.
6. Farrah, a recent graduate of FCPS who has strong feelings about the state of our schools.

ANYONE who cares about our community should care about our public schools. They all have a right to vote, run for office (yes, even for school board!), and voice their opinions.
Saying you should have to have children in the system in order to run for SB or to vote is gross discrimination and is voter suppression. Think about how that would sound if you replaced your qualifier (about having school-age children) with a different one, such as gender, sex, religion, skin color, difference in ability, etc. Think about that. Just think. I hope you are ashamed of yourself!

Yes, that's what I'm saying. The only people with a say should be those with skin in the game who are directly impacted by the schools. That means parents.

By your reasoning, we should open up voting for Governor to the following people:
1. Arthur, who lives in California but his kids live in Virginia
2. Beatrice, a former Virginia resident who has retired to Florida but still has friends here
3. Carlos, a house cleaner who lives in Maryland but cleans houses in Virginia
4. Jorge, a Guatemalan currently walking towards the Texas border, where he hopes CBP will give him a free bus ticket to Virginia
5. Mohamed, a waiter in Jeddah who has been reading up on Virginia history
6. Kim, a North Korean who has strong feelings about the state of government in Virgina

[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.

DP. What's "very odd" is that is there NO compelling logistical need to move Forestville. None. Yet you continue to insist that "there might be!!" when there isn't. I picture you gleefully rubbing your hands together, hoping fervently that there will one day be a need for this. Perhaps there will - but when both Langley and Herndon currently are doing fine, and new neighborhoods are currently being built within both school boundaries, that day will most likely never come. Sorry.

[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.

This. It's actually gotten to the point where it's kind of (sadly) amusing, reading these posts. They are hoping SO BADLY that something (not sure what?) will happen to make Forestville go to Herndon. I love how every few posts one of them will say (ominously), "It might very well happen. We'll just have to wait and see." Um, ok?!

[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:

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.

Any suggestion that has a whiff of possibly affecting certain schools in certain ways is labeled social engineering around here — even before the renovations over the past few years occurred. It is sad. Just wait until next year when standards based grading is applied to all schools.

What’s sad about it? Parents should advocate for their kids. I’d take that any day of the week over someone who wants to upend the apple cart based on some vague misguided sense of social justice.

And deep down most people on this board know they would feel the exact same way if it were their kids’ educations on the line.

+1
So true and even more funny that none of the SJWs/Forestville-haters will ever tell us what school their own kids attend. What's beyond odd is taking such an obsessive interest in schools that their kids don't have anything to do with.

[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:

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.

Any suggestion that has a whiff of possibly affecting certain schools in certain ways is labeled social engineering around here — even before the renovations over the past few years occurred. It is sad. Just wait until next year when standards based grading is applied to all schools.

What’s sad about it? Parents should advocate for their kids. I’d take that any day of the week over someone who wants to upend the apple cart based on some vague misguided sense of social justice.

And deep down most people on this board know they would feel the exact same way if it were their kids’ educations on the line.

Whoa. That is quite the accusation about another FCPS school. You should see your therapist. That is next level overreacting.

I know, right? It’s like I have this obsession with trying to screw over other people’s kids. It’s really next level f-ed up. I pretend to care about poor people, but I really just hate a subset of our county that I believe has money.

It’s infuriating, I just can’t sleep at night, it tears me apart. I seethe.

Oh wait, that’s you, the paternalistic social engineer looking to have Forestville kids play savior for other people’s kids.

It turns out that wanting what’s best for one’s child is typically not grounds to see a therapist. You however, sweetie, should consider it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The grocery stores have large bags of ice.
Pick one up to soothe your butthurt.

That’s funny because the biggest butthurt on the forum is Langley posters getting so worked up whenever the mere possibility that their school might be part of a future boundary discussion is mentioned.

DP. The only person getting worked up - and very much so - is you. The rest of us are entertained by your complete lack of self-awareness. You are stating the obvious. Of course, any school could be part of a future boundary discussion. But you seem intent on willing Forestville into this discussion when, as other posters have pointed out repeatedly, there is zero need to send Forestville students to Herndon. Why are you so fixated on this? Oh, and what school do your kids attend?