Western High School Boundary Map options (A/B/C/D)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meren sent the following in her newsletter.

"Regarding boundary phasing: I advocate that phasing avoid disrupting families with siblings in secondary grades, especially regarding the transition from a middle school building to a high school building. I support phasing that allows families with a student(s) in high school and a student(s) in middle school to continue having their middle school student(s) follow into their sibling’s high school. I support such phasing for this initial implementation of the boundary review work, to ease us all into new boundaries that optimize resources and reduce split feeders among pyramids. Boundary review goals do not all have to be achieved in this first year of implementation! Furthermore, the changes that the Board adopts on January 22, 2026, cannot be a one-size-fits-all determination for this geographically huge county. There are different opinions among School Board Members about this, though, so your continued advocacy to the full Board remains important. "

So Meren wants the new school to start in 2027. I understand she usually prefers taking time before making a decision, but bifurcating the KAA boundary change from the comprehsinve boundary change would be also problematic. For example, under Scenario 4, Emerald Chase kids are moving from Westfield to SLHS in 2026. Now they will move again in 2027 to KAA.

Yes. More from Merens newsletter:

"The Superintendent has recognized that the timeline to assign students to Western’s first class for fall 2026 is too ambitious. There will be too many unanswered questions for families to comfortably prepare students for such a transition.

Second, it comes down to County permitting. It was during the October 30, first meeting of the Joint Facility Review Committee, of which I’m on, that it became clear that permitting to transition the building for a fall opening by FCPS would not be completed in the needed timeline. A key factor is completing the “2232 Process”, in a best-case scenario of five months. This is not enough time to then COMPLETE necessary structural adjustments to the facility by the fall.

Additionally, it’s become clear that the school division needs to maintain its original commitment to the comprehensive boundary review process that has been underway for over a year. The thoughtful work of the comprehensive review deserves focused attention until the planned completion when the School Board votes on January 22, on the Superintendent’s proposed changes. Also, I have seen how hard FCPS staff are working on all of these efforts, and it’s not sustainable nor optimal.

I am relieved to see a reasonable approach to opening this new public facility asset in FCPS. I understand that the Board will still vote publicly as scheduled on November 13, on the school’s “programming”, which means establishing the school as a comprehensive “traditional” high school, rather than a magnet, with a to-be-determined boundary drawn from the local geographic area. This remains aligned with FCPS’ Capital Improvement Program (CIP) long-term plan to alleviate overcrowding at Westfield, Chantilly, and Centreville High Schools. The Board’s specific meeting agendas are posted on Board Docs days prior to a meeting."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the above... the school doesn't have a full set of fields and interior layout doesn't lend itself to a traditional high school. Instead of spending TENS OF MILLIONS more to make it a traditional high school, house a variety of specialty and choice programs and academies (fine arts, AI and data science, aerospace, early childhood, IB, etc.). Attendance doesn't need to be limited exclusively to Western HS but obviously will be heavily slanted that way (can even reserve a minimum set of seats for other Western HS to ensure their capacity is addressed, though I think self-selection due to travel times will address this sufficiently).

This provides the needed capacity relief to western HS, expands and diversifies FCPS' program offerings, and kids can continue to play sports at their base schools if they want that experience on top of the specialty programming.

Turning this school into a traditional neighborhood school would be squandering a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for FCPS.

You want the equivalent of a DC Charter School. Turning it into a school housing a variety of specialty and choice programs and academies (fine arts, AI and data science, aerospace, early childhood, IB, etc.) would be squandering a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for FCPS.

By that statement, FCPS should have opened South County as an opt-in site with a variety of special programs. SCSS opened with grades 7-11 for SY2005-06. SY2006-07 had grade 12. SY2023-13 the middle school opened.

This has a middle school, Carson. FCPS should clean up all the AAP MS shuffles and boundaries as part of this endeavor for Liberty, Stone, Rocky Run, Franklin, Carson.

Correct, I'm advocating that we learn from our mistakes rather than repeat them. The shortsighted one-size-fits-all approach, especially for a facility that was physically constructed in a unique way not easily compatible with a traditional comprehensive high school model, unfortunately seems to be full steam ahead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meren sent the following in her newsletter.

"Regarding boundary phasing: I advocate that phasing avoid disrupting families with siblings in secondary grades, especially regarding the transition from a middle school building to a high school building. I support phasing that allows families with a student(s) in high school and a student(s) in middle school to continue having their middle school student(s) follow into their sibling’s high school. I support such phasing for this initial implementation of the boundary review work, to ease us all into new boundaries that optimize resources and reduce split feeders among pyramids. Boundary review goals do not all have to be achieved in this first year of implementation! Furthermore, the changes that the Board adopts on January 22, 2026, cannot be a one-size-fits-all determination for this geographically huge county. There are different opinions among School Board Members about this, though, so your continued advocacy to the full Board remains important. "

LOL.

When they did boundary changes in the past, including when Meren was already on the School Board, there was no "phasing" that automatically allowed a middle school student rezoned to a new high school to follow an older sibling into the prior high school. Instead, families had to specifically apply for a student transfer.

They inflict unnecessary boundary changes on some people, and then they bend over backwards to try and provide accommodations beyond what they've done in the past because they want to soften the blow of the damage they are responsible for inflicting. But it still is going to affect kids differently depending on whether they were unlucky enough to get redistricted, they have a sibling at a school, they can arrange for their own transportation to school, etc.

[Anonymous]

This Superintendent and School Board make an absolute hash of everything they touch.

We will not forget in 2027.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the above... the school doesn't have a full set of fields and interior layout doesn't lend itself to a traditional high school. Instead of spending TENS OF MILLIONS more to make it a traditional high school, house a variety of specialty and choice programs and academies (fine arts, AI and data science, aerospace, early childhood, IB, etc.). Attendance doesn't need to be limited exclusively to Western HS but obviously will be heavily slanted that way (can even reserve a minimum set of seats for other Western HS to ensure their capacity is addressed, though I think self-selection due to travel times will address this sufficiently).

This provides the needed capacity relief to western HS, expands and diversifies FCPS' program offerings, and kids can continue to play sports at their base schools if they want that experience on top of the specialty programming.

Turning this school into a traditional neighborhood school would be squandering a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for FCPS.

You want the equivalent of a DC Charter School. Turning it into a school housing a variety of specialty and choice programs and academies (fine arts, AI and data science, aerospace, early childhood, IB, etc.) would be squandering a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for FCPS.

By that statement, FCPS should have opened South County as an opt-in site with a variety of special programs. SCSS opened with grades 7-11 for SY2005-06. SY2006-07 had grade 12. SY2023-13 the middle school opened.

This has a middle school, Carson. FCPS should clean up all the AAP MS shuffles and boundaries as part of this endeavor for Liberty, Stone, Rocky Run, Franklin, Carson.

Correct, I'm advocating that we learn from our mistakes rather than repeat them. The shortsighted one-size-fits-all approach, especially for a facility that was physically constructed in a unique way not easily compatible with a traditional comprehensive high school model, unfortunately seems to be full steam ahead.

This does not resolve the need for overcrowding relief in the area. Advocate for this someplace else.

[Anonymous]

They have known about this since January. What was Reid thinking? Sure, they could not take action, but they certainly could have had a plan.

And, now, they are going to delay it, but go ahead with the comprehensive boundary? Like the PP said, there are kids being slated for a move-who would almost certainly be assigned to the new school.

They are doing this backwards. They should resolve the boundaries for KAA and then do other boundary adjustments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meren sent the following in her newsletter.

"Regarding boundary phasing: I advocate that phasing avoid disrupting families with siblings in secondary grades, especially regarding the transition from a middle school building to a high school building. I support phasing that allows families with a student(s) in high school and a student(s) in middle school to continue having their middle school student(s) follow into their sibling’s high school. I support such phasing for this initial implementation of the boundary review work, to ease us all into new boundaries that optimize resources and reduce split feeders among pyramids. Boundary review goals do not all have to be achieved in this first year of implementation! Furthermore, the changes that the Board adopts on January 22, 2026, cannot be a one-size-fits-all determination for this geographically huge county. There are different opinions among School Board Members about this, though, so your continued advocacy to the full Board remains important. "

LOL.

When they did boundary changes in the past, including when Meren was already on the School Board, there was no "phasing" that automatically allowed a middle school student rezoned to a new high school to follow an older sibling into the prior high school. Instead, families had to specifically apply for a student transfer.

They inflict unnecessary boundary changes on some people, and then they bend over backwards to try and provide accommodations beyond what they've done in the past because they want to soften the blow of the damage they are responsible for inflicting. But it still is going to affect kids differently depending on whether they were unlucky enough to get redistricted, they have a sibling at a school, they can arrange for their own transportation to school, etc.

Probably because the next school board election is in 2027.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meren sent the following in her newsletter.

"Regarding boundary phasing: I advocate that phasing avoid disrupting families with siblings in secondary grades, especially regarding the transition from a middle school building to a high school building. I support phasing that allows families with a student(s) in high school and a student(s) in middle school to continue having their middle school student(s) follow into their sibling’s high school. I support such phasing for this initial implementation of the boundary review work, to ease us all into new boundaries that optimize resources and reduce split feeders among pyramids. Boundary review goals do not all have to be achieved in this first year of implementation! Furthermore, the changes that the Board adopts on January 22, 2026, cannot be a one-size-fits-all determination for this geographically huge county. There are different opinions among School Board Members about this, though, so your continued advocacy to the full Board remains important. "

You didn’t include the more important part regarding Western HS.

The Superintendent has recognized that the timeline to assign students to Western’s first class for fall 2026 is too ambitious. There will be too many unanswered questions for families to comfortably prepare students for such a transition.

Second, it comes down to County permitting. It was during the October 30, first meeting of the Joint Facility Review Committee, of which I’m on, that it became clear that permitting to transition the building for a fall opening by FCPS would not be completed in the needed timeline. A key factor is completing the “2232 Process”, in a best-case scenario of five months. This is not enough time to then COMPLETE necessary structural adjustments to the facility by the fall.

Additionally, it’s become clear that the school division needs to maintain its original commitment to the comprehensive boundary review process that has been underway for over a year. The thoughtful work of the comprehensive review deserves focused attention until the planned completion when the School Board votes on January 22, on the Superintendent’s proposed changes. Also, I have seen how hard FCPS staff are working on all of these efforts, and it’s not sustainable nor optimal.

I am relieved to see a reasonable approach to opening this new public facility asset in FCPS. I understand that the Board will still vote publicly as scheduled on November 13, on the school’s “programming”, which means establishing the school as a comprehensive “traditional” high school, rather than a magnet, with a to-be-determined boundary drawn from the local geographic area. This remains aligned with FCPS’ Capital Improvement Program (CIP) long-term plan to alleviate overcrowding at Westfield, Chantilly, and Centreville High Schools. The Board’s specific meeting agendas are posted on Board Docs days prior to a meeting.

Western HS remains an exciting opportunity and new public facility asset, and a tremendous financial savings to Fairfax taxpayers. More information about the purchase of Western HS is here.

So is Meren saying that this school will not open at all until fall 2027? If so why wasn't this shared at the meeting Reid attended on Saturday? Or is she saying the permitting/construction timeline makes it impossible to anything other than an opt in type of approach?

[Anonymous]

Well, if they are going to wait until 2027, they need to go ahead and set the boundaries. If not, kids could be moving two times in two years. Not a good plan.

Set the boundaries now. Do not move anyone who is in the future boundaries until the school opens.

[Anonymous]

Quite the “turnkey acquisition” this is turning out to be. No doubt the total cost will just keep on creeping up and delaying other school renovation projects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Quite the “turnkey acquisition” this is turning out to be. No doubt the total cost will just keep on creeping up and delaying other school renovation projects.

Meren was never for this. And, it could have been ready in 2026 if we had a superintendent who made a plan. Permits could have been secured and the expenses kept to a minimum if they had a plan.

But, if what Meren says is accurate--and it sounds so--it is time to take serious steps about leadership. Because this falls on leadership.

[Anonymous]

I didn’t think they could mess this up any more then they already have. Maybe put the boundary moves off until 2027 so they can include the new school in the mix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I didn’t think they could mess this up any more then they already have. Maybe put the boundary moves off until 2027 so they can include the new school in the mix.

Yup.

Delay after delay.

[Anonymous]

Push it off for another year. Like they did with the middle school start times. Mark my words: nothing will actually happen next year with this incompetent leadership.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Push it off for another year. Like they did with the middle school start times. Mark my words: nothing will actually happen next year with this incompetent leadership.

Step 1