FCPS demographic changes are largest cost increase besides salary. explain it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in a high FARMS area and I am disgusted when I see 2-3 buses dropping off children at apartment complexes, because the school board is KNOWINGLY UNDERCOUNTING how many children apartments yield. They know DAMN WELL that they need to adjust their yield formula for apartment complexes on this side of the county, and they are not.

Why are you disgusted?

Besides overcrowding at a particular school, what's the problem with FCPS having incorrect yield formulas? If they tweak it and make it more correct, it will cause them to change school boundaries and move kids around to even out the load amongst all the schools - this is a good thing - but it wouldn't change the underlying issue of an increasing school age population or of the other issue you seem to highlight, which is not enough real estate tax revenue. These two things are outside the powers of FCPS.

FCPS can perhaps do a better job of distributing students to spread the overcrowding around but their lack of doing so doesn't seem to rise to "disgusting" imo.

Different PP. The BOS needs to do a better job of enforcing their own laws. You are not allowed to overcrowd apartments. It's against the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in a high FARMS area and I am disgusted when I see 2-3 buses dropping off children at apartment complexes, because the school board is KNOWINGLY UNDERCOUNTING how many children apartments yield. They know DAMN WELL that they need to adjust their yield formula for apartment complexes on this side of the county, and they are not.

Why are you disgusted?

Besides overcrowding at a particular school, what's the problem with FCPS having incorrect yield formulas? If they tweak it and make it more correct, it will cause them to change school boundaries and move kids around to even out the load amongst all the schools - this is a good thing - but it wouldn't change the underlying issue of an increasing school age population or of the other issue you seem to highlight, which is not enough real estate tax revenue. These two things are outside the powers of FCPS.

FCPS can perhaps do a better job of distributing students to spread the overcrowding around but their lack of doing so doesn't seem to rise to "disgusting" imo.

I agree, and they have to be careful (if anything, more careful) about redistricting when the high concentrations of ESOL/FARMS kids live very close to a particular school. If they aren't careful, the redistricting then pushes the school over a tipping point where the non-ESOL/FARMS families start to plan their exit strategy.

[Anonymous]

Who exactly at FCPS made these promises and failed to execute?

Don't know. I didn't attend the meeting, but it was on the information sheet in our neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in a high FARMS area and I am disgusted when I see 2-3 buses dropping off children at apartment complexes, because the school board is KNOWINGLY UNDERCOUNTING how many children apartments yield. They know DAMN WELL that they need to adjust their yield formula for apartment complexes on this side of the county, and they are not.

Why are you disgusted?

Besides overcrowding at a particular school, what's the problem with FCPS having incorrect yield formulas? If they tweak it and make it more correct, it will cause them to change school boundaries and move kids around to even out the load amongst all the schools - this is a good thing - but it wouldn't change the underlying issue of an increasing school age population or of the other issue you seem to highlight, which is not enough real estate tax revenue. These two things are outside the powers of FCPS.

FCPS can perhaps do a better job of distributing students to spread the overcrowding around but their lack of doing so doesn't seem to rise to "disgusting" imo.

The yield formulas impact how much real estate taxes the owners are charged, so it does make a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Who exactly at FCPS made these promises and failed to execute?

Don't know. I didn't attend the meeting, but it was on the information sheet in our neighborhood.

I think this is why all my neighbors are against any type of new development, because the promises made are never kept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Who exactly at FCPS made these promises and failed to execute?

Don't know. I didn't attend the meeting, but it was on the information sheet in our neighborhood.

I think this is why all my neighbors are against any type of new development, because the promises made are never kept.

Was the information shhet prepared by FCPS or a community member? Sometimes people hear and pass on what they want to hear or think they heard, or individuals associated with FCPS get ahead of themselves. It's one thing if the head of facilities or planning tells people that kids will be rezoned to another school to address overcrowding, but another thing if a School Board member says in passing it's something that should be looked at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in a high FARMS area and I am disgusted when I see 2-3 buses dropping off children at apartment complexes, because the school board is KNOWINGLY UNDERCOUNTING how many children apartments yield. They know DAMN WELL that they need to adjust their yield formula for apartment complexes on this side of the county, and they are not.

Why are you disgusted?

Besides overcrowding at a particular school, what's the problem with FCPS having incorrect yield formulas? If they tweak it and make it more correct, it will cause them to change school boundaries and move kids around to even out the load amongst all the schools - this is a good thing - but it wouldn't change the underlying issue of an increasing school age population or of the other issue you seem to highlight, which is not enough real estate tax revenue. These two things are outside the powers of FCPS.

FCPS can perhaps do a better job of distributing students to spread the overcrowding around but their lack of doing so doesn't seem to rise to "disgusting" imo.

Different PP. The BOS needs to do a better job of enforcing their own laws. You are not allowed to overcrowd apartments. It's against the law.

Ok, sure, but that is a BOS failure, not FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in a high FARMS area and I am disgusted when I see 2-3 buses dropping off children at apartment complexes, because the school board is KNOWINGLY UNDERCOUNTING how many children apartments yield. They know DAMN WELL that they need to adjust their yield formula for apartment complexes on this side of the county, and they are not.

Why are you disgusted?

Besides overcrowding at a particular school, what's the problem with FCPS having incorrect yield formulas? If they tweak it and make it more correct, it will cause them to change school boundaries and move kids around to even out the load amongst all the schools - this is a good thing - but it wouldn't change the underlying issue of an increasing school age population or of the other issue you seem to highlight, which is not enough real estate tax revenue. These two things are outside the powers of FCPS.

FCPS can perhaps do a better job of distributing students to spread the overcrowding around but their lack of doing so doesn't seem to rise to "disgusting" imo.

Different PP. The BOS needs to do a better job of enforcing their own laws. You are not allowed to overcrowd apartments. It's against the law.

It all comes from the same taxes and same government. FCPS works for Fairfax County Government.

Ok, sure, but that is a BOS failure, not FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The yield formulas impact how much real estate taxes the owners are charged, so it does make a difference.

Really? This is news to me. Do you have cites / sources?

As far as I know, Fairfax bases it real estate taxes on a base rate x (value of land + improvements), plus special charges for certain specific tax districts (like Reston CC, McLean CC, etc.). Nowhere does it talk about "yield." Now obviously a 3BR apt occupying the same sqft as a 2BR next door will have more RE taxes because its assessed value is higher, but that's not directly a yield issue.

Maybe you know more than me - I don't own an apartment building. Maybe you're just wrong.

As an aside, low rise garden apartments pay 16x more than SFHs in real estate taxes per acre. High rise apartments/condos pay 116x more in real estate taxes than SFH per acre. If you want more real estate taxes for schools, you want more apartment buildings. Too bad that doesn't play into your narrative.

Facts here: http://www.baconsrebellion.com/PDFs/2013/02/McKeeman.pdf [VT master's thesis, 2012. Not mine.]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in a high FARMS area and I am disgusted when I see 2-3 buses dropping off children at apartment complexes, because the school board is KNOWINGLY UNDERCOUNTING how many children apartments yield. They know DAMN WELL that they need to adjust their yield formula for apartment complexes on this side of the county, and they are not.

Why are you disgusted?

Besides overcrowding at a particular school, what's the problem with FCPS having incorrect yield formulas? If they tweak it and make it more correct, it will cause them to change school boundaries and move kids around to even out the load amongst all the schools - this is a good thing - but it wouldn't change the underlying issue of an increasing school age population or of the other issue you seem to highlight, which is not enough real estate tax revenue. These two things are outside the powers of FCPS.

FCPS can perhaps do a better job of distributing students to spread the overcrowding around but their lack of doing so doesn't seem to rise to "disgusting" imo.

Different PP. The BOS needs to do a better job of enforcing their own laws. You are not allowed to overcrowd apartments. It's against the law.

It all comes from the same taxes and same government. FCPS works for Fairfax County Government.

Ok, sure, but that is a BOS failure, not FCPS.

Yes, but FCPS has no power to do what you are asking it to do, nor should it be in the business of reporting families for such violations.

You really want FCPS to work towards reducing illegal overcrowded apartments? That's insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The yield formulas impact how much real estate taxes the owners are charged, so it does make a difference.

Really? This is news to me. Do you have cites / sources?

As far as I know, Fairfax bases it real estate taxes on a base rate x (value of land + improvements), plus special charges for certain specific tax districts (like Reston CC, McLean CC, etc.). Nowhere does it talk about "yield." Now obviously a 3BR apt occupying the same sqft as a 2BR next door will have more RE taxes because its assessed value is higher, but that's not directly a yield issue.

Maybe you know more than me - I don't own an apartment building. Maybe you're just wrong.

As an aside, low rise garden apartments pay 16x more than SFHs in real estate taxes per acre. High rise apartments/condos pay 116x more in real estate taxes than SFH per acre. If you want more real estate taxes for schools, you want more apartment buildings. Too bad that doesn't play into your narrative.

Facts here: http://www.baconsrebellion.com/PDFs/2013/02/McKeeman.pdf [VT master's thesis, 2012. Not mine.]

Well, that is based on how many children are expected to live in an apartment building vs. a SFH . Even if they are assuming 2 children for each 2 bedroom apartment, the apartment buildings in my area seem to have WAY more children than that per apartment. So the tax is based on an assumption of "normal" living situations, not the current overcrowding of several families per apartment. A SFH might average one or two children. One garden-style apartment building in our area can fill two school buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The yield formulas impact how much real estate taxes the owners are charged, so it does make a difference.

Really? This is news to me. Do you have cites / sources?

As far as I know, Fairfax bases it real estate taxes on a base rate x (value of land + improvements), plus special charges for certain specific tax districts (like Reston CC, McLean CC, etc.). Nowhere does it talk about "yield." Now obviously a 3BR apt occupying the same sqft as a 2BR next door will have more RE taxes because its assessed value is higher, but that's not directly a yield issue.

Maybe you know more than me - I don't own an apartment building. Maybe you're just wrong.

As an aside, low rise garden apartments pay 16x more than SFHs in real estate taxes per acre. High rise apartments/condos pay 116x more in real estate taxes than SFH per acre. If you want more real estate taxes for schools, you want more apartment buildings. Too bad that doesn't play into your narrative.

Facts here: http://www.baconsrebellion.com/PDFs/2013/02/McKeeman.pdf [VT master's thesis, 2012. Not mine.]

Well, that is based on how many children are expected to live in an apartment building vs. a SFH . Even if they are assuming 2 children for each 2 bedroom apartment, the apartment buildings in my area seem to have WAY more children than that per apartment. So the tax is based on an assumption of "normal" living situations, not the current overcrowding of several families per apartment. A SFH might average one or two children. One garden-style apartment building in our area can fill two school buses.

What are you talking about?

Real estate taxes in Fairfax County are based on assessed value of the property. They don't assume any living situations, normal or otherwise.

Do you think I can get my real estate taxes reduced by telling the DTA that it was vacant for a year and no one lived there? The answer is no, no I can't. The tax is not based on what you think it is based on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I live in a high FARMS area and I am disgusted when I see 2-3 buses dropping off children at apartment complexes, because the school board is KNOWINGLY UNDERCOUNTING how many children apartments yield. They know DAMN WELL that they need to adjust their yield formula for apartment complexes on this side of the county, and they are not.

Why are you disgusted?

Besides overcrowding at a particular school, what's the problem with FCPS having incorrect yield formulas? If they tweak it and make it more correct, it will cause them to change school boundaries and move kids around to even out the load amongst all the schools - this is a good thing - but it wouldn't change the underlying issue of an increasing school age population or of the other issue you seem to highlight, which is not enough real estate tax revenue. These two things are outside the powers of FCPS.

FCPS can perhaps do a better job of distributing students to spread the overcrowding around but their lack of doing so doesn't seem to rise to "disgusting" imo.

Different PP. The BOS needs to do a better job of enforcing their own laws. You are not allowed to overcrowd apartments. It's against the law.

It all comes from the same taxes and same government. FCPS works for Fairfax County Government.

Ok, sure, but that is a BOS failure, not FCPS.

Yes, but FCPS has no power to do what you are asking it to do, nor should it be in the business of reporting families for such violations.

You really want FCPS to work towards reducing illegal overcrowded apartments? That's insane.

One PP here. I want them to be a STRONGER VOICE for change on this issue. I have only ever heard Sandy Evans, my board member, meekly and weakly speak about what is causing overcrowding issues in our schools. I know that at the end of the day they are just politicians, but even being just a BIT less politically correct would go a long way. Our student population keeps growing with little housing being added - this is a HUGE EFFING PROBLEM.

And it is not the BOS that sets student ratio yield formulas; it is FCPS.

And schools have tremendous power to track overcrowding. Three families using one address for school registration? Send it over to code enforcement to investigate. This would be a very simple cross-reference of their address database and measures like this would not require much manpower.

See Maryland tagged cars dropping off children? I see this a lot. I assume that they are car tax-dodging or undocumented immigrants taking advantage of Maryland's lax laws. They have no business having their children attending our schools. They should be going to school in Maryland, where they are paying their taxes. Set up police to ticket them. Fine them and get them OUT! Car taxes fund schools and other municipal programs.

[Anonymous]

As an aside, low rise garden apartments pay 16x more than SFHs in real estate taxes per acre. High rise apartments/condos pay 116x more in real estate taxes than SFH per acre. If you want more real estate taxes for schools, you want more apartment buildings. Too bad that doesn't play into your narrative.

I question some of those "facts"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

As an aside, low rise garden apartments pay 16x more than SFHs in real estate taxes per acre. High rise apartments/condos pay 116x more in real estate taxes than SFH per acre. If you want more real estate taxes for schools, you want more apartment buildings. Too bad that doesn't play into your narrative.

I question some of those "facts"

It is a fact that denser development yields more tax money for the municipal government. However, gone are the days where singles and young newlyweds occupied apartments and condos - families are filling them now.

Dense development (i.e. older garden apartments) in my area seems to yield 1-3 children per unit, which is highly problematic and does not AT ALL fit to FCPS' yield formula of .325 students per unit for garden apartments.

http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9S3QDQ66BA89/$file/Attachment%20A%20-%20November%2020%202014%20FCPS%20School%20Impact%20Proffer%20Formula%20and%20Student%20Yield%20Ratio%20Update.pdf

They need a much more complicated yield formula than the one they have currently.