FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[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:

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:Come on, folks.

Let’s be realistic. The school board will never approve a move from Langley to Herndon. Herndon is over 60% capacity, and when/if South Lakes High School (SLHS) closes to transfers, Herndon’s enrollment will only increase.

Let’s stop talking about that scenario. It’s a waste of time.

They seem fairly anchored to leaving schools within the 60-105% range alone, but that's just one of their "guiding principles." They also refer to alignment with Policy 8130 and the SB (if not Thru) could identify that as an independent basis to move kids from Langley to Herndon regardless of whether Langley is over 105% or Herndon under 60%.

I'm not advocating for this. I just think that, politically, the optics are horrible if they propose to move kids who live within a mile or two of West Springfield to Lewis or South County, and do nothing to move at least some Langley kids to Herndon when Herndon is much closer. It makes it look as if all the talk about transportation efficiencies was a sham and they got bullied into leaving Langley alone. I've heard all the arguments about how traffic is worse in Herndon so the commuting times wouldn't be reduced as much as you'd think, but people will look at the maps and draw their own conclusions.

They don't really care about optics when it comes to Langley/Herndon.

For the past ten years, I've heard talk of moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon. For some reason, certain posters keep bringing it up.

Doesn’t matter what they think. It's not going to happen.

Full stop.

Why because you and your rich friends founded some sort of association that is lobbying against it? Donating thousands to school board members? You're trying to buy your way out of being rezoned and everybody knows it.

I am in FairFACTs Matters and no where close to Langley nor Herndon. Nor WSHS and Lewis.

There’s also no requirement to donate anything.

+2 it’s literally just a FB group. You can join it whenever you want!

A Fb group that raised over $50,000.

They regularly pay for FOIA requests, which add up.

I wouldn't donate to them, but I hope they are using the funds for what they were intended for.

Thanks for that information. Sad that there has to be a group that needs FOIA. I am grateful to those who donate. If FCPS would be more transparent, FOIA would not be necessary.

It was only through FairFacts’ advocacy that the BRAC member list was disclosed and that they started putting their meeting notes online. Otherwise we’d all be in the dark about this.

Also noting they just posted this. Thus far, this has been the only way for community members to engage with the closed-door BRAC. The pyramid nor special interest members are not doing this unless you happen to have a direct connection.

“For those looking to send community feedback, please email us at [e-mail] with your questions or comments. We have already submitted three communications reflecting community feedback and will continue to share the most commonly asked questions moving forward. We will provide previous communications with community feedback below.“

How disgusting that these people are only sharing information with a small handful of members of the county who live in one specific area and not everyone.

Also it's clearly not a Facebook group when they have their own domain.

Maybe you don’t understand. Fairfacts matters is soliciting feedback to provide to Fairfax County, since they have spots on BRAC now. They are opening the dialogue to everyone across the county, not just one particular pyramid. Oh, and it seems that anyone can join- it’s a county-wide organization.

I’m guessing you understand and that you are just desperately trying to make them the bad guy, but just in case you didn’t understand, I figured i would directly address your concerns.

Are they politically motivated? Just answer the question.

If you're asking if the group is a bunch of Republicans calling attention to school boundaries in an effort to swing elections, the answer is a definitive "no."

There are certainly a handful of republicans who reminded the group in its first weeks that they voted for the fairfax dems who have had re-districting for equity on their agenda for years now. A few independents who tell the group to accept equity redistricting as the price to pay for all the dem stuff they want their school board to do.

Mostly it's democrats who just want to stay democrats and to work with the board for the outcome they want. The LAST thing they want is to vote for republicans or be called republicans.

Thanks, I just have nightmares about Joanne Sears and Rory Cooper whose open FCPS effort had a very clear Republican agenda and whose agenda worked - angry mommas elected Glenn Youngkin. I don't want a repeat of that.

And, you think shifting kids all over the county is going to elect a Democrat?

All I'm saying is that I'm tired of these politically motivated organizations saying they're doing what's best for students when really it's all about politics. I've seen it all over this board and it's going to get worse as we get closer and closer to the election. Every year like clockwork, they come and they post here (both sides) and try to scare parent into voting for them by talking about how horrible the schools are. The truth it, the schools are good, and motivated students with parents who guide them are going to do great no matter where they are zoned.

Hi there. I can tell you that I used to vote for Democrats, but can’t anymore because of the boundary changes. I don’t think I could live with myself if I voted the same way at the national level, but the democrats have really shot themselves in the foot with the boundary change stuff. There is a reason why those political groups focus on this issue - It’s broadly unpopular across the political spectrum.

If you’re just saying that you don’t want scrutiny of the school board and it’s extreme actions/agenda, just say it, don’t dance around the issue. It sounds like you ardently believe in the boundary changes, and are trying to deflect scrutiny on them. Just say that.

This is the PERFECT example of a political troll coming on here trying to influence people to think that this one issue worth voting for a Republican (everyone can make their own decision but personally I am against banning books and guns in the classroom, so there's that). I can spot y'all from a mile away, I hope that everyone else can too. I am NOT a single issue voter. My child's school is likely to change, but I'd rather that than have all the things that come with a Republican school board. Again, NOT a single issue voter. People here need to do their research on ALL candidates and ALL of their opinions. And note that a Republican governor has ZERO influence on the school board, so don't base your gubernatorial vote on boundary studies.

DP. What on earth are you babbling about?

People can find Donald Trump and Karl Frisch repulsive in equal measure for different reasons.

And a Republican Governor can absolutely affect local school policy in Fairfax. Miyares already sent one middle school a cease-and-desist order for a civil rights violation, and Youngkin’s administration is monitoring this boundary review in FCPS carefully.

And the bit about banning books? Give me a break. It’s a classic far-left trope to claim we have to be neutral about what books are in school libraries and not exercise any discretion (so the smutty books are fine), but it’s also fine to impose progressive values on public school students (the issue in the MoCo case currently before the Supreme Court involving mandatory training on gender and sexuality).

When it comes to boundaries this crowd will never convince people it’s based on a desire to operate more efficiently because we’ve seen first-hand how willing folks like Frisch and McDaniel are to waste tens of millions on unnecessary projects like Dunn Loring ES.

Once again making it clear that you are here for political reasons and not here for the school boundaries.

People absolutely can vote for Democrats for national office and be ready to consign this horrible School Board to the dust bin for their hypocrisy and bungling of just about everything they touch, including school boundaries.

Except that the root cause of muck dislike for certain pyramids is the high immigrant population. Poor and ESL. You can argue this all you want but it is the truth. And Iax border security policies endorsed and executed by Democrats is to blame.

You voted for trump to get rid of immigrants, but didn’t look at his economic policy or project 2025. You have zero credibility in this boundary debate. Your judgement of immigration being a bigger issue than citizen rights, upholding the constitution and the economy speaks clearly to the idea you are easily mislead.

This isn't about national politics. This is very local.

That is not what the PP wrote.
She said it was about immigrants and lax border security policies brought by dems.

The school issue, at the root, is undoubtedly about immigration. What do you think people are trying to avoid at Herndon and Lewis? And it is the biggest issue facing the U.S.

[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:

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:Come on, folks.

Let’s be realistic. The school board will never approve a move from Langley to Herndon. Herndon is over 60% capacity, and when/if South Lakes High School (SLHS) closes to transfers, Herndon’s enrollment will only increase.

Let’s stop talking about that scenario. It’s a waste of time.

They seem fairly anchored to leaving schools within the 60-105% range alone, but that's just one of their "guiding principles." They also refer to alignment with Policy 8130 and the SB (if not Thru) could identify that as an independent basis to move kids from Langley to Herndon regardless of whether Langley is over 105% or Herndon under 60%.

I'm not advocating for this. I just think that, politically, the optics are horrible if they propose to move kids who live within a mile or two of West Springfield to Lewis or South County, and do nothing to move at least some Langley kids to Herndon when Herndon is much closer. It makes it look as if all the talk about transportation efficiencies was a sham and they got bullied into leaving Langley alone. I've heard all the arguments about how traffic is worse in Herndon so the commuting times wouldn't be reduced as much as you'd think, but people will look at the maps and draw their own conclusions.

They don't really care about optics when it comes to Langley/Herndon.

For the past ten years, I've heard talk of moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon. For some reason, certain posters keep bringing it up.

Doesn’t matter what they think. It's not going to happen.

Full stop.

Why because you and your rich friends founded some sort of association that is lobbying against it? Donating thousands to school board members? You're trying to buy your way out of being rezoned and everybody knows it.

I am in FairFACTs Matters and no where close to Langley nor Herndon. Nor WSHS and Lewis.

There’s also no requirement to donate anything.

+2 it’s literally just a FB group. You can join it whenever you want!

A Fb group that raised over $50,000.

They regularly pay for FOIA requests, which add up.

I wouldn't donate to them, but I hope they are using the funds for what they were intended for.

Thanks for that information. Sad that there has to be a group that needs FOIA. I am grateful to those who donate. If FCPS would be more transparent, FOIA would not be necessary.

It was only through FairFacts’ advocacy that the BRAC member list was disclosed and that they started putting their meeting notes online. Otherwise we’d all be in the dark about this.

Also noting they just posted this. Thus far, this has been the only way for community members to engage with the closed-door BRAC. The pyramid nor special interest members are not doing this unless you happen to have a direct connection.

“For those looking to send community feedback, please email us at [e-mail] with your questions or comments. We have already submitted three communications reflecting community feedback and will continue to share the most commonly asked questions moving forward. We will provide previous communications with community feedback below.“

How disgusting that these people are only sharing information with a small handful of members of the county who live in one specific area and not everyone.

Also it's clearly not a Facebook group when they have their own domain.

Maybe you don’t understand. Fairfacts matters is soliciting feedback to provide to Fairfax County, since they have spots on BRAC now. They are opening the dialogue to everyone across the county, not just one particular pyramid. Oh, and it seems that anyone can join- it’s a county-wide organization.

I’m guessing you understand and that you are just desperately trying to make them the bad guy, but just in case you didn’t understand, I figured i would directly address your concerns.

Are they politically motivated? Just answer the question.

If you're asking if the group is a bunch of Republicans calling attention to school boundaries in an effort to swing elections, the answer is a definitive "no."

There are certainly a handful of republicans who reminded the group in its first weeks that they voted for the fairfax dems who have had re-districting for equity on their agenda for years now. A few independents who tell the group to accept equity redistricting as the price to pay for all the dem stuff they want their school board to do.

Mostly it's democrats who just want to stay democrats and to work with the board for the outcome they want. The LAST thing they want is to vote for republicans or be called republicans.

Thanks, I just have nightmares about Joanne Sears and Rory Cooper whose open FCPS effort had a very clear Republican agenda and whose agenda worked - angry mommas elected Glenn Youngkin. I don't want a repeat of that.

And, you think shifting kids all over the county is going to elect a Democrat?

All I'm saying is that I'm tired of these politically motivated organizations saying they're doing what's best for students when really it's all about politics. I've seen it all over this board and it's going to get worse as we get closer and closer to the election. Every year like clockwork, they come and they post here (both sides) and try to scare parent into voting for them by talking about how horrible the schools are. The truth it, the schools are good, and motivated students with parents who guide them are going to do great no matter where they are zoned.

Hi there. I can tell you that I used to vote for Democrats, but can’t anymore because of the boundary changes. I don’t think I could live with myself if I voted the same way at the national level, but the democrats have really shot themselves in the foot with the boundary change stuff. There is a reason why those political groups focus on this issue - It’s broadly unpopular across the political spectrum.

If you’re just saying that you don’t want scrutiny of the school board and it’s extreme actions/agenda, just say it, don’t dance around the issue. It sounds like you ardently believe in the boundary changes, and are trying to deflect scrutiny on them. Just say that.

This is the PERFECT example of a political troll coming on here trying to influence people to think that this one issue worth voting for a Republican (everyone can make their own decision but personally I am against banning books and guns in the classroom, so there's that). I can spot y'all from a mile away, I hope that everyone else can too. I am NOT a single issue voter. My child's school is likely to change, but I'd rather that than have all the things that come with a Republican school board. Again, NOT a single issue voter. People here need to do their research on ALL candidates and ALL of their opinions. And note that a Republican governor has ZERO influence on the school board, so don't base your gubernatorial vote on boundary studies.

DP. What on earth are you babbling about?

People can find Donald Trump and Karl Frisch repulsive in equal measure for different reasons.

And a Republican Governor can absolutely affect local school policy in Fairfax. Miyares already sent one middle school a cease-and-desist order for a civil rights violation, and Youngkin’s administration is monitoring this boundary review in FCPS carefully.

And the bit about banning books? Give me a break. It’s a classic far-left trope to claim we have to be neutral about what books are in school libraries and not exercise any discretion (so the smutty books are fine), but it’s also fine to impose progressive values on public school students (the issue in the MoCo case currently before the Supreme Court involving mandatory training on gender and sexuality).

When it comes to boundaries this crowd will never convince people it’s based on a desire to operate more efficiently because we’ve seen first-hand how willing folks like Frisch and McDaniel are to waste tens of millions on unnecessary projects like Dunn Loring ES.

Once again making it clear that you are here for political reasons and not here for the school boundaries.

People absolutely can vote for Democrats for national office and be ready to consign this horrible School Board to the dust bin for their hypocrisy and bungling of just about everything they touch, including school boundaries.

Except that the root cause of muck dislike for certain pyramids is the high immigrant population. Poor and ESL. You can argue this all you want but it is the truth. And Iax border security policies endorsed and executed by Democrats is to blame.

You voted for trump to get rid of immigrants, but didn’t look at his economic policy or project 2025. You have zero credibility in this boundary debate. Your judgement of immigration being a bigger issue than citizen rights, upholding the constitution and the economy speaks clearly to the idea you are easily mislead.

This isn't about national politics. This is very local.

That is not what the PP wrote.
She said it was about immigrants and lax border security policies brought by dems.

The school issue, at the root, is undoubtedly about immigration. What do you think people are trying to avoid at Herndon and Lewis? And it is the biggest issue facing the U.S.

That is the way YOU see it. As a WSHS family that could move to Lewis my biggest issues are actually:

1. That one of my kids could be moved in the middle of his high school career and how disruptive that can be socially and academically.

2. how crappy the commute is to get to Lewis and how loathe I am to do it to get to after school activities/games especially when there are 2 high schools closer to our house (WSHS, Lake Braddock)

3. That the school is apparently falling apart.(according to posters here anyway)

4. That the school doesn’t seem to be giving the kids there enough support. The county isn’t making pathways for immigrant kids to succeed at that school, so they are looking at my high achieving kid as a pawn to be moved rather than fixing the way success is reported and marked or helping kids actually find success.

So to YOU, it may be “undoubtedly” about immigration, but there are many factors for most of us.

[Anonymous]

That the school doesn’t seem to be giving the kids there enough support. The county isn’t making pathways for immigrant kids to succeed at that school, so they are looking at my high achieving kid as a pawn to be moved rather than fixing the way success is reported and marked or helping kids actually find success.

So, this is the point for our One Fairfax School Board. They need to address the problem head on rather than attempting to cover it up.

I taught kids who lived in extreme poverty. You need to start where they are and move them forward. Sending in the wealthier kids will do nothing to help them.

But, the School Board just cares about how the scores look. It is a lot easier to pour in wealth rather than to teach the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And note that a Republican governor has ZERO influence on the school board, so don't base your gubernatorial vote on boundary studies.

I think the issue is about listening to the parents. That is why Youngkin beat McAuliffe. The current SB is not listening to their community. Sadly, because we really have no local news, lots of people are totally unaware.

This is also what the Supreme Court case from Montgomery County is about.

They can’t listen to “parents” because parents have many different opinions. I am a parent who supports the boundary review. There are others like me. Listening to opponents of the review isn’t listening to “parents.” It’s listening to some parents.

Sounds like you did not follow the community participation meetings. Or the prior survey that said how parents feel about boundary shifts.

Exactly this. Boundary change proponents feebly attempt to legitimize their agenda, but it’s pretty clear from the community meetings that the county, all areas of it, are against boundary changes, especially when their own kids are in the crosshairs.

[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:

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:

Anonymous wrote:Come on, folks.

Let’s be realistic. The school board will never approve a move from Langley to Herndon. Herndon is over 60% capacity, and when/if South Lakes High School (SLHS) closes to transfers, Herndon’s enrollment will only increase.

Let’s stop talking about that scenario. It’s a waste of time.

They seem fairly anchored to leaving schools within the 60-105% range alone, but that's just one of their "guiding principles." They also refer to alignment with Policy 8130 and the SB (if not Thru) could identify that as an independent basis to move kids from Langley to Herndon regardless of whether Langley is over 105% or Herndon under 60%.

I'm not advocating for this. I just think that, politically, the optics are horrible if they propose to move kids who live within a mile or two of West Springfield to Lewis or South County, and do nothing to move at least some Langley kids to Herndon when Herndon is much closer. It makes it look as if all the talk about transportation efficiencies was a sham and they got bullied into leaving Langley alone. I've heard all the arguments about how traffic is worse in Herndon so the commuting times wouldn't be reduced as much as you'd think, but people will look at the maps and draw their own conclusions.

They don't really care about optics when it comes to Langley/Herndon.

For the past ten years, I've heard talk of moving Great Falls kids from Langley to Herndon. For some reason, certain posters keep bringing it up.

Doesn’t matter what they think. It's not going to happen.

Full stop.

Why because you and your rich friends founded some sort of association that is lobbying against it? Donating thousands to school board members? You're trying to buy your way out of being rezoned and everybody knows it.

I am in FairFACTs Matters and no where close to Langley nor Herndon. Nor WSHS and Lewis.

There’s also no requirement to donate anything.

+2 it’s literally just a FB group. You can join it whenever you want!

A Fb group that raised over $50,000.

They regularly pay for FOIA requests, which add up.

I wouldn't donate to them, but I hope they are using the funds for what they were intended for.

Thanks for that information. Sad that there has to be a group that needs FOIA. I am grateful to those who donate. If FCPS would be more transparent, FOIA would not be necessary.

It was only through FairFacts’ advocacy that the BRAC member list was disclosed and that they started putting their meeting notes online. Otherwise we’d all be in the dark about this.

Also noting they just posted this. Thus far, this has been the only way for community members to engage with the closed-door BRAC. The pyramid nor special interest members are not doing this unless you happen to have a direct connection.

“For those looking to send community feedback, please email us at [e-mail] with your questions or comments. We have already submitted three communications reflecting community feedback and will continue to share the most commonly asked questions moving forward. We will provide previous communications with community feedback below.“

How disgusting that these people are only sharing information with a small handful of members of the county who live in one specific area and not everyone.

Also it's clearly not a Facebook group when they have their own domain.

Maybe you don’t understand. Fairfacts matters is soliciting feedback to provide to Fairfax County, since they have spots on BRAC now. They are opening the dialogue to everyone across the county, not just one particular pyramid. Oh, and it seems that anyone can join- it’s a county-wide organization.

I’m guessing you understand and that you are just desperately trying to make them the bad guy, but just in case you didn’t understand, I figured i would directly address your concerns.

Are they politically motivated? Just answer the question.

If you're asking if the group is a bunch of Republicans calling attention to school boundaries in an effort to swing elections, the answer is a definitive "no."

There are certainly a handful of republicans who reminded the group in its first weeks that they voted for the fairfax dems who have had re-districting for equity on their agenda for years now. A few independents who tell the group to accept equity redistricting as the price to pay for all the dem stuff they want their school board to do.

Mostly it's democrats who just want to stay democrats and to work with the board for the outcome they want. The LAST thing they want is to vote for republicans or be called republicans.

Thanks, I just have nightmares about Joanne Sears and Rory Cooper whose open FCPS effort had a very clear Republican agenda and whose agenda worked - angry mommas elected Glenn Youngkin. I don't want a repeat of that.

And, you think shifting kids all over the county is going to elect a Democrat?

All I'm saying is that I'm tired of these politically motivated organizations saying they're doing what's best for students when really it's all about politics. I've seen it all over this board and it's going to get worse as we get closer and closer to the election. Every year like clockwork, they come and they post here (both sides) and try to scare parent into voting for them by talking about how horrible the schools are. The truth it, the schools are good, and motivated students with parents who guide them are going to do great no matter where they are zoned.

Hi there. I can tell you that I used to vote for Democrats, but can’t anymore because of the boundary changes. I don’t think I could live with myself if I voted the same way at the national level, but the democrats have really shot themselves in the foot with the boundary change stuff. There is a reason why those political groups focus on this issue - It’s broadly unpopular across the political spectrum.

If you’re just saying that you don’t want scrutiny of the school board and it’s extreme actions/agenda, just say it, don’t dance around the issue. It sounds like you ardently believe in the boundary changes, and are trying to deflect scrutiny on them. Just say that.

This is the PERFECT example of a political troll coming on here trying to influence people to think that this one issue worth voting for a Republican (everyone can make their own decision but personally I am against banning books and guns in the classroom, so there's that). I can spot y'all from a mile away, I hope that everyone else can too. I am NOT a single issue voter. My child's school is likely to change, but I'd rather that than have all the things that come with a Republican school board. Again, NOT a single issue voter. People here need to do their research on ALL candidates and ALL of their opinions. And note that a Republican governor has ZERO influence on the school board, so don't base your gubernatorial vote on boundary studies.

DP. What on earth are you babbling about?

People can find Donald Trump and Karl Frisch repulsive in equal measure for different reasons.

And a Republican Governor can absolutely affect local school policy in Fairfax. Miyares already sent one middle school a cease-and-desist order for a civil rights violation, and Youngkin’s administration is monitoring this boundary review in FCPS carefully.

And the bit about banning books? Give me a break. It’s a classic far-left trope to claim we have to be neutral about what books are in school libraries and not exercise any discretion (so the smutty books are fine), but it’s also fine to impose progressive values on public school students (the issue in the MoCo case currently before the Supreme Court involving mandatory training on gender and sexuality).

When it comes to boundaries this crowd will never convince people it’s based on a desire to operate more efficiently because we’ve seen first-hand how willing folks like Frisch and McDaniel are to waste tens of millions on unnecessary projects like Dunn Loring ES.

Once again making it clear that you are here for political reasons and not here for the school boundaries.

People absolutely can vote for Democrats for national office and be ready to consign this horrible School Board to the dust bin for their hypocrisy and bungling of just about everything they touch, including school boundaries.

Except that the root cause of muck dislike for certain pyramids is the high immigrant population. Poor and ESL. You can argue this all you want but it is the truth. And Iax border security policies endorsed and executed by Democrats is to blame.

You voted for trump to get rid of immigrants, but didn’t look at his economic policy or project 2025. You have zero credibility in this boundary debate. Your judgement of immigration being a bigger issue than citizen rights, upholding the constitution and the economy speaks clearly to the idea you are easily mislead.

This isn't about national politics. This is very local.

That is not what the PP wrote.
She said it was about immigrants and lax border security policies brought by dems.

The school issue, at the root, is undoubtedly about immigration. What do you think people are trying to avoid at Herndon and Lewis? And it is the biggest issue facing the U.S.

That is the way YOU see it. As a WSHS family that could move to Lewis my biggest issues are actually:

1. That one of my kids could be moved in the middle of his high school career and how disruptive that can be socially and academically.

2. how crappy the commute is to get to Lewis and how loathe I am to do it to get to after school activities/games especially when there are 2 high schools closer to our house (WSHS, Lake Braddock)

3. That the school is apparently falling apart.(according to posters here anyway)

4. That the school doesn’t seem to be giving the kids there enough support. The county isn’t making pathways for immigrant kids to succeed at that school, so they are looking at my high achieving kid as a pawn to be moved rather than fixing the way success is reported and marked or helping kids actually find success.

So to YOU, it may be “undoubtedly” about immigration, but there are many factors for most of us.

Add to this that WSHS has an incredibly compact boundary. We have a large school, but even so, it feels like community because we ALL live within about 3 miles from each other! We have an incredibly diverse school that WORKS. The issue is not being scared of Lewis - it's about not wanting to leave our high school and community that we love.

Add to that - we are an AP school. If my high school junior has to move to Lewis, after already taking AP classes and having a plan for finishing out high school with AP, switching to a school that is an IB school is not going to work.

[Anonymous]

I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

Hi, Vijay.

No, they aren’t going to make all these changes just so your kid can go to Oakton rather than Falls Church. You really should move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

You cannot have Marshall be the only High School for Tysons. They are planning for a population of 100,000- Unless you are talking about a super mega large high rise sort of high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

You cannot have Marshall be the only High School for Tysons. They are planning for a population of 100,000- Unless you are talking about a super mega large high rise sort of high school.

Ignore this guy. He’s the guy on the FairFACTS Matters page who is always pushing for boundary changes because he’s unhappy with his assigned school (Falls Church). His suggestions make no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

This area is proposed to be moved from Holmes/Edison to Holmes/Annandale to eliminate the egregious split feeder at Holmes. The idea that it would instead go from Holmes/Edison to Holmes/Lewis would do nothing to fix the split feeder at Holmes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

You cannot have Marshall be the only High School for Tysons. They are planning for a population of 100,000- Unless you are talking about a super mega large high rise sort of high school.

They could repurpose an empty office building in western Tysons and build an urban school similar to Bailey’s upper. Much cheaper than building a new school, can be placed in area of capacity need and makes good use of vacant commercial buildings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

You cannot have Marshall be the only High School for Tysons. They are planning for a population of 100,000- Unless you are talking about a super mega large high rise sort of high school.

They could repurpose an empty office building in western Tysons and build an urban school similar to Bailey’s upper. Much cheaper than building a new school, can be placed in area of capacity need and makes good use of vacant commercial buildings.

W I’ll you be willing to send your child to a High Scool like that? One with over 1,000 students in each grade?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

You cannot have Marshall be the only High School for Tysons. They are planning for a population of 100,000- Unless you are talking about a super mega large high rise sort of high school.

They could repurpose an empty office building in western Tysons and build an urban school similar to Bailey’s upper. Much cheaper than building a new school, can be placed in area of capacity need and makes good use of vacant commercial buildings.

No one wants that jind of high school. It would be disastrous for whoever was forced to attend it.

High schoolers need sports fields, theaters, indoor gyms/basketball courts and parking lot space.

A high rise building in a densely developed area shortchanges those kids and will not give them an equivalent education to every other high school student in FCPS.

The only way a high rise high school would be remotely feasible is if it was a non traditional magnet, such as a trades magnet, an ESL magnet or an alternative school like Bryant. Even kids at anIB magnet or a school like TJ want a real high school experience, not a second rate high rise building.

Traditional high school students in a district as wealthy as FCPS with its 4 billion plus budget deserve a first rate, traditional high school experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm interested about the impact on school enrollment in this situation. I'm just spitballing scenarios based on geographic factors (mainly major highways).

- McLean is condensed, with enrollment restricted to the borders of 267 on the west and 123 on the north (loses the Pimmit/Tysons cut outs and Timber Lane).
- Marshall shifts north and becomes the "Tysons" HS. It is restricted to the current boundary with Madison on the west, 66 on the south, and 267 on the north and east.
- Timber Lane and Shrevewood S of 66 move to Falls Church.
- Falls Church west of Prosperity goes to Oakton.

I'm guessing this would leave McLean under-enrolled and it introduces risk to Marshall if Tyson's grows too quickly, but I'd be curious to see the numbers.

Similarly, I wonder about the scenario where:

- Lewis gains the area north of the Beltway from Edison.
- Edison takes the NE wing of Hayfield.
- South County takes the area of WSHS south of 286.

You cannot have Marshall be the only High School for Tysons. They are planning for a population of 100,000- Unless you are talking about a super mega large high rise sort of high school.

Dp, Agree that Marshall alone wouldn't make sense. The proposed moves to McLean seem warranted, but when we talk about growth in Tysons, it's hard to predict how many of those will be families.

There's a reason why so many DINKs live in Tysons; it's a great place to live if you're a DINK. And the more the more singles and DINKs that live there, the more it seems to attract.

[Anonymous]

I just looked at the membership lists for the three schools (Langley, Marshall, and McLean). For all of this talk about a big increase at Tyson's, I'm not seeing any shift yet.
I am not familiar with the area and do not know the elementary schools. Has there been a big increase there yet?

I don't doubt there may be an increase coming, but shouldn't there be some indication by now?