Boundary Review Meetings
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Glad to hear that it happened in this way. |
Anonymous
I suspect that the school board's final map is going to be very different than the maps the parents have been commenting on from BRAC. |
Anonymous
They were enamored of doing a county-wide review that "hadn't been done in 40 years." They didn't bother to figure out what had been done over the past 40 years, why they might not have done a county-wide review for decades, and what ground rules had informed the prior county-wide reviews. If they'd looked at what had been done over the past 40 years, they'd have known there were multiple boundary adjustments over the years, so any inflated claims that no one had looked at boundaries for 40 years were nonsense. If they'd considered why there hadn't been a county-wide review for decades, they might have realized that their predecessors had realized that the county had become too big, and the schools too varied, to pull one off successfully. It's one thing to change boundaries when, for example, every high school had AP and there were no "academies," or every middle school only had grades 7-8. It's another thing when they've intentionally put different programs in different schools, and then invited families to make decisions about where to live based on those differences. Again, this was never acknowledged. And, finally, they made no effort to familiarize themselves with the ground rules that had informed past county-wide reviews, one of which was that the scope of changes would be limited in advance to ensure FCPS could continue to provide transportation to grandfathered students as the changes were phased in. Again, this was ignored, and now they are scrambling because they've set themselves to do something that wasn't done in the past (deny transportation to redistricted kids), favors families with more resources, and would be quite unpopular. This all happened because the School Board members are lazy and arrogant, and the superintendent had no experience with a school division anywhere near the size of FCPS. The incompetence is off the charts and will continue until voters stop electing School Board members based entirely on their party affiliation and not their qualifications. |
Anonymous
| So, parents successfully bullied the SB into letting go of changing anything, right? |
Anonymous
Hardly. |
Anonymous
We have no idea what the map looks like now. They never updated it after Version 4 even though they showed a new version to parents at that Lewis meeting. Reid refuses to release any new maps until she gives her version to the school board. It's anyone's guess what's been proposed now. |
Anonymous
Bless your heart. Reid hired consultants who were deeply incompetent and once that became clear it became a free-for-all. They could have gone big or gone small, but they just went stupid. |
Anonymous
So much for Reid's commitment to transparency. She's such a phony. |
Anonymous
This is what worries me. We haven’t been the target of any changes so far and our middle and HS are both a little under capacity. But who knows what changes they might push through if there are cascading effects from some of the WSHS/Lewis stuff? |
Anonymous
Agreed. The fact that a School Board member sent out an update that included recommendations that we have never seen is problematic. They should dial this back to 1) Address the Western HS boundaries 2) Dealt with any school that is overcrowded. Stop there. They could have reasonable solutions that some people would not love, because no one wants to move, but would make sense because they address an identified need. |
Anonymous
OK, but in that case they need to have a clear metric for overcrowding. Changing boundaries based on being over 105% overcrowding in the fall of 2024 doesn't necessarily make sense. Some enrollments have come down this year. We were specifically told by a School Board member in the past that FCPS only cared about schools over 110%. |
Anonymous
Don't use 2025-26 enrollment. The year is almost over and class of 2026 is abnormally huge. At many of the schools, class of 2026 is 100 to 150 students larger than the 8th grade classes replacing them. I think Chantilly class of 2026 is over 200 students larger than the 8th grade class replacing them. Use the current 8th through 11th grade numbers to determin overcrowding. It will paint a very different picture than the 2024 enrollment projections that FCPS is using to justify rezoining. |
Anonymous
When does she present her version to the board? Early January? |
Anonymous
It was heroic parents standing up for kids in the face of bully Sandy and the rest of the school board goons. These parents saved a lot of kids. I wish they could’ve protected them all, and my heart aches for the kids whose lives are about to be upended by boundary changes without any justification. |
Anonymous
Looking forward is smarter than looking backwards but a lot of high schools pick up kids from K-8 private and parochial schools so a comparison of 11th and 8th grade enrollments could be misleading. We’ve listened to people at one crowded high school say year after year that the enrollment will come down “next year” and it stays overcrowded. They just don’t want to move. |