Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This place gets more wild every time I check back.

Good faith question - I know who/which schools are making the community argument. Where is the counterargument coming from? I assume people happy in their zoning are off not on DCUM so what particular boundary is the other side of this internet brawl so unhappy about?

You can be happy with your school assignment and unhappy that your elected officials would kowtow so much to the wealthiest, noisiest parents in the county. It makes a mockery of public education.

The school board listening to constituents saves public education. You keep pretending that dragging all the schools down to the lowest level will somehow save the system. In reality, the opposite is true, it’ll severely diminish the school system.

Are you saying that if you are rich, your kids should only go to school with other rich kids? Low income kids should study alongside other poor kids, despite some of these families with large income disparities living in relative proximity?

Are you saying the non Oakton, Langley and Mclean boundary zones should continually be grateful to them because they raise the tax base?

What I’m saying is that social engineering doesn’t work, in part because it drives away a critical block of support for public schools, namely the UMC.

I know it’s hard for you to understand, but I really do want to keep my kids in the school system and hope that the school board doesn’t force my hand.

It’s so incredibly penny wise pound foolish to assume that these parents are going to stick around through continued uncertainty where they lose their communities.

Oh, I pray your 'hand is forced' and my public school kids don't have to mix with yours. Lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This place gets more wild every time I check back.

Good faith question - I know who/which schools are making the community argument. Where is the counterargument coming from? I assume people happy in their zoning are off not on DCUM so what particular boundary is the other side of this internet brawl so unhappy about?

You can be happy with your school assignment and unhappy that your elected officials would kowtow so much to the wealthiest, noisiest parents in the county. It makes a mockery of public education.

The school board listening to constituents saves public education. You keep pretending that dragging all the schools down to the lowest level will somehow save the system. In reality, the opposite is true, it’ll severely diminish the school system.

So what I am taking to be the answer is that this is less about school boundaries and more a forum for fighting over differences in worldviews...

100% The last 20 posts are about rich people thinking they are better than non-rich people, and slightly-less-rich people feeling insecure that they only make $250k and furious that the rich people look down on them.

If that’s true, then your post is about shaking down your neighbors for a handout because you’re too lazy to get involved in your kids’ school. Talk about feeling insecure. 🤣

This was my post...I don't understand...? Lurking but not frequently posting so I think you are conflating posters.

[Anonymous]

Almost 60% kids at Coates, and 50% kids at Herndon HS live in household's income being being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line

[Anonymous]

Only 30% kids at South Lake High school live in household's income being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line.

So why Fox Mill want to go to the new school? Mystery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This place gets more wild every time I check back.

Good faith question - I know who/which schools are making the community argument. Where is the counterargument coming from? I assume people happy in their zoning are off not on DCUM so what particular boundary is the other side of this internet brawl so unhappy about?

You can be happy with your school assignment and unhappy that your elected officials would kowtow so much to the wealthiest, noisiest parents in the county. It makes a mockery of public education.

The school board listening to constituents saves public education. You keep pretending that dragging all the schools down to the lowest level will somehow save the system. In reality, the opposite is true, it’ll severely diminish the school system.

You keep pretending that more rational boundaries with fewer split feeders and shorter commutes will tank the system, when it might actually enhance the sense of community you pretend to care so much about. Very transparent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Almost 60% kids at Coates, and 50% kids at Herndon HS live in household's income being being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line

You are exaggerating those numbers. Why are you doing that?

With the new construction, Coates has dropped about 10% in the last year to close to 50--and quite a few of those will attend Herndon. And, Herndon is much closer to 40% than 50. About 60% of those kids are NOT below poverty level.

Is this about keeping your kids away from poor children? Sounds like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only 30% kids at South Lake High school live in household's income being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line.

So why Fox Mill want to go to the new school? Mystery.

Marshall is also only 20% FARMs, yet is being characterized as a rough school from a 90s movie in desperate need of Madison students to turn their baseball team around.

The Madison/Marshall recommendations were to unravel split feeders. Not some social experiment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This place gets more wild every time I check back.

Good faith question - I know who/which schools are making the community argument. Where is the counterargument coming from? I assume people happy in their zoning are off not on DCUM so what particular boundary is the other side of this internet brawl so unhappy about?

You can be happy with your school assignment and unhappy that your elected officials would kowtow so much to the wealthiest, noisiest parents in the county. It makes a mockery of public education.

The school board listening to constituents saves public education. You keep pretending that dragging all the schools down to the lowest level will somehow save the system. In reality, the opposite is true, it’ll severely diminish the school system.

Are you saying that if you are rich, your kids should only go to school with other rich kids? Low income kids should study alongside other poor kids, despite some of these families with large income disparities living in relative proximity?

Are you saying the non Oakton, Langley and Mclean boundary zones should continually be grateful to them because they raise the tax base?

What I’m saying is that social engineering doesn’t work, in part because it drives away a critical block of support for public schools, namely the UMC.

I know it’s hard for you to understand, but I really do want to keep my kids in the school system and hope that the school board doesn’t force my hand.

It’s so incredibly penny wise pound foolish to assume that these parents are going to stick around through continued uncertainty where they lose their communities.

If a kid is admitted to a private the county collects the same property tax from you but FCPS has 1 less kid on it's budget. There has not been a magical expansion of private schools.

If scenario 5 removes the 190 from Timber Lane, Mclean is at 105% without the used /relocated modular. For the Langley pyramid Churchill RD has an old modular. 124% without it. Spring Hill has the only growth in Langley feeders in 20 years: plus 208. All others down 533 and that VDOE number excludes the diminished Forestville to Forest Edge AAP feed.

What does it mean for static boundaries? Residences did not disappear but k-12 population aged out. So circumstances will eventually change as real estate turns over compounding the Langley overcapacity from the Spring Hill island SPA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This place gets more wild every time I check back.

Good faith question - I know who/which schools are making the community argument. Where is the counterargument coming from? I assume people happy in their zoning are off not on DCUM so what particular boundary is the other side of this internet brawl so unhappy about?

You can be happy with your school assignment and unhappy that your elected officials would kowtow so much to the wealthiest, noisiest parents in the county. It makes a mockery of public education.

The school board listening to constituents saves public education. You keep pretending that dragging all the schools down to the lowest level will somehow save the system. In reality, the opposite is true, it’ll severely diminish the school system.

Are you saying that if you are rich, your kids should only go to school with other rich kids? Low income kids should study alongside other poor kids, despite some of these families with large income disparities living in relative proximity?

Are you saying the non Oakton, Langley and Mclean boundary zones should continually be grateful to them because they raise the tax base?

What I’m saying is that social engineering doesn’t work, in part because it drives away a critical block of support for public schools, namely the UMC.

I know it’s hard for you to understand, but I really do want to keep my kids in the school system and hope that the school board doesn’t force my hand.

It’s so incredibly penny wise pound foolish to assume that these parents are going to stick around through continued uncertainty where they lose their communities.

If a kid is admitted to a private the county collects the same property tax from you but FCPS has 1 less kid on it's budget. There has not been a magical expansion of private schools.

If scenario 5 removes the 190 from Timber Lane, Mclean is at 105% without the used /relocated modular. For the Langley pyramid Churchill RD has an old modular. 124% without it. Spring Hill has the only growth in Langley feeders in 20 years: plus 208. All others down 533 and that VDOE number excludes the diminished Forestville to Forest Edge AAP feed.

What does it mean for static boundaries? Residences did not disappear but k-12 population aged out. So circumstances will eventually change as real estate turns over compounding the Langley overcapacity from the Spring Hill island SPA.

Word salad lady strikes again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Only 30% kids at South Lake High school live in household's income being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line.

So why Fox Mill want to go to the new school? Mystery.

Because they don’t want to be moved out of Carson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This place gets more wild every time I check back.

Good faith question - I know who/which schools are making the community argument. Where is the counterargument coming from? I assume people happy in their zoning are off not on DCUM so what particular boundary is the other side of this internet brawl so unhappy about?

You can be happy with your school assignment and unhappy that your elected officials would kowtow so much to the wealthiest, noisiest parents in the county. It makes a mockery of public education.

The school board listening to constituents saves public education. You keep pretending that dragging all the schools down to the lowest level will somehow save the system. In reality, the opposite is true, it’ll severely diminish the school system.

Are you saying that if you are rich, your kids should only go to school with other rich kids? Low income kids should study alongside other poor kids, despite some of these families with large income disparities living in relative proximity?

Are you saying the non Oakton, Langley and Mclean boundary zones should continually be grateful to them because they raise the tax base?

What I’m saying is that social engineering doesn’t work, in part because it drives away a critical block of support for public schools, namely the UMC.

I know it’s hard for you to understand, but I really do want to keep my kids in the school system and hope that the school board doesn’t force my hand.

It’s so incredibly penny wise pound foolish to assume that these parents are going to stick around through continued uncertainty where they lose their communities.

If a kid is admitted to a private the county collects the same property tax from you but FCPS has 1 less kid on it's budget. There has not been a magical expansion of private schools.

If scenario 5 removes the 190 from Timber Lane, Mclean is at 105% without the used /relocated modular. For the Langley pyramid Churchill RD has an old modular. 124% without it. Spring Hill has the only growth in Langley feeders in 20 years: plus 208. All others down 533 and that VDOE number excludes the diminished Forestville to Forest Edge AAP feed.

What does it mean for static boundaries? Residences did not disappear but k-12 population aged out. So circumstances will eventually change as real estate turns over compounding the Langley overcapacity from the Spring Hill island SPA.

You forget the other side of the coin, tax rolls. For now, UMC goes along with funding public schools. Take away their support, and all of a sudden teachers are setting up gofundme to afford crayons and after school programs get axed. It’s happened time and time again. You think this time will be different? Wagering the entire school system on that. It’s too bad you don’t see it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost 60% kids at Coates, and 50% kids at Herndon HS live in household's income being being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line

You are exaggerating those numbers. Why are you doing that?

With the new construction, Coates has dropped about 10% in the last year to close to 50--and quite a few of those will attend Herndon. And, Herndon is much closer to 40% than 50. About 60% of those kids are NOT below poverty level.

Is this about keeping your kids away from poor children? Sounds like it.

There are some real violence issues at Herndon High. We saw that with the death threats from students at the school and the ultimate drive-by murder of a student a few weeks ago. Who gives a crap about FARMS when kids are being murdered?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost 60% kids at Coates, and 50% kids at Herndon HS live in household's income being being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line

You are exaggerating those numbers. Why are you doing that?

With the new construction, Coates has dropped about 10% in the last year to close to 50--and quite a few of those will attend Herndon. And, Herndon is much closer to 40% than 50. About 60% of those kids are NOT below poverty level.

Is this about keeping your kids away from poor children? Sounds like it.

There are some real violence issues at Herndon High. We saw that with the death threats from students at the school and the ultimate drive-by murder of a student a few weeks ago. Who gives a crap about FARMS when kids are being murdered?

My kids go the Herndon, and I’m going to be honest, when that news came out, I was concerned. When I asked my kids about it, they said they didn’t know any of the kids involved, and nobody their circles of friends discussed it.
They are focused on their school work, friendships, and my senior is eagerly awaiting college decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This place gets more wild every time I check back.

Good faith question - I know who/which schools are making the community argument. Where is the counterargument coming from? I assume people happy in their zoning are off not on DCUM so what particular boundary is the other side of this internet brawl so unhappy about?

You can be happy with your school assignment and unhappy that your elected officials would kowtow so much to the wealthiest, noisiest parents in the county. It makes a mockery of public education.

The school board listening to constituents saves public education. You keep pretending that dragging all the schools down to the lowest level will somehow save the system. In reality, the opposite is true, it’ll severely diminish the school system.

Are you saying that if you are rich, your kids should only go to school with other rich kids? Low income kids should study alongside other poor kids, despite some of these families with large income disparities living in relative proximity?

Are you saying the non Oakton, Langley and Mclean boundary zones should continually be grateful to them because they raise the tax base?

What I’m saying is that social engineering doesn’t work, in part because it drives away a critical block of support for public schools, namely the UMC.

I know it’s hard for you to understand, but I really do want to keep my kids in the school system and hope that the school board doesn’t force my hand.

It’s so incredibly penny wise pound foolish to assume that these parents are going to stick around through continued uncertainty where they lose their communities.

If a kid is admitted to a private the county collects the same property tax from you but FCPS has 1 less kid on it's budget. There has not been a magical expansion of private schools.

If scenario 5 removes the 190 from Timber Lane, Mclean is at 105% without the used /relocated modular. For the Langley pyramid Churchill RD has an old modular. 124% without it. Spring Hill has the only growth in Langley feeders in 20 years: plus 208. All others down 533 and that VDOE number excludes the diminished Forestville to Forest Edge AAP feed.

What does it mean for static boundaries? Residences did not disappear but k-12 population aged out. So circumstances will eventually change as real estate turns over compounding the Langley overcapacity from the Spring Hill island SPA.

Word salad lady strikes again.

Very convenient for you to disparage those facts with a rude comment. Even Thru now includes capacity utilization % without modulars. What's your explanation for the large membership decreases at Forestville, Great Falls Elementary, Churchill Road, and Colvin Run?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Almost 60% kids at Coates, and 50% kids at Herndon HS live in household's income being being at or below 150% of the federal poverty line

You are exaggerating those numbers. Why are you doing that?

With the new construction, Coates has dropped about 10% in the last year to close to 50--and quite a few of those will attend Herndon. And, Herndon is much closer to 40% than 50. About 60% of those kids are NOT below poverty level.

Is this about keeping your kids away from poor children? Sounds like it.

There are some real violence issues at Herndon High. We saw that with the death threats from students at the school and the ultimate drive-by murder of a student a few weeks ago. Who gives a crap about FARMS when kids are being murdered?

Meanwhile over at Langley we have an instructional aide arresting for fonding himself in a classroom, a dad who murdered his own Langley kid, and kids doing skits that impersonate kidnappings of Jews. But, sure, rail against Herndon all you want, it won't stop them from redistricting western Great Falls there eventually.