Boundary Review Meetings
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Sounds good in theory but the whole idea behind this boundary review was to outsource the work to a third-party consultant so the School Board members could avoid accountability. The consultant hired by Reid then offered up a bunch of cowardly but still half-baked recommendations that created as many problems as they solved. Since the School Board was continuing to say they were relying on others to come up with sensible proposals well into the fall, it was left to parents to call out the many mistakes in Thru’s proposals. And, yes, the parents who did that tend to be wealthier and better organized than those who just sit back and accept whatever FCPS serves up. |
Anonymous
The Policy 8130 revisions didn’t align with what families want. They should have known that very well from the prior outreach but Sizemore-Heizer and others stubbornly pushed through the revisions. Then, when Thru selectively focused on some, but not all, of the factors in Policy 8130, people objected and they folded like a house of cards - in part because they belatedly realized how little support there was for the priorities in Policy 8130. Well, duh. That left them with no anchor, which is why it now appears to many they simply acceded to the wishes of the loudest, wealthiest parents. But it’s their own damn fault. They started out with the wrong priorities and ended up with no principles, so of course it devolved into a free-for-all. In a better world, people like Sizemore-Heizer, Frisch, and Reid would suffer the consequences of their incompetence, but this doesn’t happen in one-party Fairfax, as Sizemore-Heizer’s elevation to the BOS demonstrates. |