FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per FairFacts Matters FB page...

PTSA Meeting May 6, 7:30 pm WSHS Sandy and Rachna School Board Attend
*No lines have been drawn don’t know where changes will be
*Will propose what lines could be drawn
*Then draw proposed lines
*We are currently a few steps behind proposed boundary lines.
*Q-Is HVES turning into a split feeder? (Asked by numerous people)
A-Sandy that wouldn’t be the intention or something the board would support
Q-So then the intention is to turn the neighborhoods south of FFX Parkway zoned for NFES? (Numerous people asked)
A-Rachna No plans yet. Waiting on draft of first maps.
Q-CIP school projection numbers have been historically off. Paraphrase-What are you doing to rectify the problem? No answer. Ignored question.
*Sandy grew up in Middle Valley area and recognizes Middle Valley area vocalizing concerns.
*3,700 student transfers in FCPS
400 Student athletes transfers
*No maps you can rely on for boundary changes.
*These are maps to determine the SCOPE of the problem.
*Briefing to SB Jan 2026 of maps. Then vote on implementation for 2026-2027.
*Funding exists for MS after school programs for one year and crossing guards one year 2025-2026.
Will reevaluate following year

It sounds like they couldn’t have showed up to the meeting less prepared.

Total gaslighting or complete incompetence from Rachna and Sandy at this meeting. Rachna in particular seemed to be repeating old talking points from prior to the release of the recent maps. Even said “no secret maps.” No one is worried about secret maps any more. We want to talk about released maps, which they downplayed and sort of denied..? Blabbed on about cell phone policy and Hayfield sports while the chat filled with questions about HV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Yep. Saratoga currently at 75% can take whatever excess from the neighboring newington. Easy peasy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Yep. Saratoga currently at 75% can take whatever excess from the neighboring newington. Easy peasy.

But Saratoga is already taking that RV split feeder, which surprisingly had over 100 students in it. I hadnt realized that area was so large. That puts Saratoga at 91% per their calculations. They could take a few more students, but not enough to put all or most of HV south of the Parkway at Newington Forest. Especially with NFES projected at 101% after they get ~40 from the Sangster island.

Halley has capacity after dumping their island to Lorton Station/Hayfield - but it’s quite a bit further away.

[Anonymous]

Can they point to anything they’ve proposed that would actually help ensure equitable access to programs or minimize travel time for students?

All they’ve really done is punch down and propose to make some random changes to replace one ugly map with another ugly map. I mean, look at the proposed new Chantilly boundaries - they look absurd.

They clearly don’t have the courage to do what they originally set out to do and should just call the whole thing off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I looking at the wrong slides? the maps...don't have streets? You can't zoom in and see what they are doing?

I'm on the BRAC and we were given the exact same slides on 8 1/2" x 11" paper that were posted on the Boundary Review website. In my region, we (the committee members) were very confused as to which streets were included in the proposed moves. We were given a huge map with detailed streets BUT it was a separate map from the slides. Trying to put the two together was impossible. We were pulling up current boundary maps on our phones to try and figure out which streets were included in the moves.

Who on the BRAC lives in Medford Leas. Really weird that pocket south of the parkway is still going to WSHS.

They probably couldn’t get that neighborhood without overburdening South County. Interestingly when I saw the map, I assumed the neighborhood that was excluded was those large, newer homes across from the Sunoco on Gambrill. Anyway, their calculations now show SCMS at 102% and SCHS at 95% with the changes, so I’d assume if they picked up Medford Leas, it would have put SCMS over 105%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Yep. Saratoga currently at 75% can take whatever excess from the neighboring newington. Easy peasy.

But Saratoga is already taking that RV split feeder, which surprisingly had over 100 students in it. I hadnt realized that area was so large. That puts Saratoga at 91% per their calculations. They could take a few more students, but not enough to put all or most of HV south of the Parkway at Newington Forest. Especially with NFES projected at 101% after they get ~40 from the Sangster island.

Halley has capacity after dumping their island to Lorton Station/Hayfield - but it’s quite a bit further away.

I don’t think it was stated that every split feeder would be eliminated. Just that it was a goal. RV can stay while NF/Saratoga help WSHS and Lewis enrollments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Unless there’s a slide detailing the redistribution of students, it’s a split feeder. Any time students move from one school to another they document that movement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Yep. Saratoga currently at 75% can take whatever excess from the neighboring newington. Easy peasy.

But Saratoga is already taking that RV split feeder, which surprisingly had over 100 students in it. I hadnt realized that area was so large. That puts Saratoga at 91% per their calculations. They could take a few more students, but not enough to put all or most of HV south of the Parkway at Newington Forest. Especially with NFES projected at 101% after they get ~40 from the Sangster island.

Halley has capacity after dumping their island to Lorton Station/Hayfield - but it’s quite a bit further away.

I don’t think it was stated that every split feeder would be eliminated. Just that it was a goal. RV can stay while NF/Saratoga help WSHS and Lewis enrollments.

They generally didn’t address split feeders unless (1) less than 25% of an ES fed to a MS or less than 25% of a MS fed to a HS and (2) the school itself wasn’t located in the <25% area.

Their proposals for dealing with attendance islands and capacity issues also created new split feeders, some of which were the types of split feeders they were otherwise treating as problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can they point to anything they’ve proposed that would actually help ensure equitable access to programs or minimize travel time for students?

All they’ve really done is punch down and propose to make some random changes to replace one ugly map with another ugly map. I mean, look at the proposed new Chantilly boundaries - they look absurd.

They clearly don’t have the courage to do what they originally set out to do and should just call the whole thing off.

It’s clear that they’ve considered those factors. There is a difference between having considered those factors vs. having considered them with the lens that you want to apply them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can they point to anything they’ve proposed that would actually help ensure equitable access to programs or minimize travel time for students?

All they’ve really done is punch down and propose to make some random changes to replace one ugly map with another ugly map. I mean, look at the proposed new Chantilly boundaries - they look absurd.

They clearly don’t have the courage to do what they originally set out to do and should just call the whole thing off.

It’s clear that they’ve considered those factors. There is a difference between having considered those factors vs. having considered them with the lens that you want to apply them.

Sounds more like you are just pleased they ignored them. Where’s the proof they were considered other than blanket assertions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Saratoga is already taking about 100 rolling valley kids, the ones who were RV/Key/lewis got switched to Saratoga/key/lewis.

Also leaves rolling valley pretty empty. We already barely had enough kids for two kindergarten classes this year. The program capacity number is, I believe, because our special ed classrooms use a lot of space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can they point to anything they’ve proposed that would actually help ensure equitable access to programs or minimize travel time for students?

All they’ve really done is punch down and propose to make some random changes to replace one ugly map with another ugly map. I mean, look at the proposed new Chantilly boundaries - they look absurd.

They clearly don’t have the courage to do what they originally set out to do and should just call the whole thing off.

It’s clear that they’ve considered those factors. There is a difference between having considered those factors vs. having considered them with the lens that you want to apply them.

Sounds more like you are just pleased they ignored them. Where’s the proof they were considered other than blanket assertions?

It’s in their slides. They’ve considered those factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Yep. Saratoga currently at 75% can take whatever excess from the neighboring newington. Easy peasy.

But Saratoga is already taking that RV split feeder, which surprisingly had over 100 students in it. I hadnt realized that area was so large. That puts Saratoga at 91% per their calculations. They could take a few more students, but not enough to put all or most of HV south of the Parkway at Newington Forest. Especially with NFES projected at 101% after they get ~40 from the Sangster island.

Halley has capacity after dumping their island to Lorton Station/Hayfield - but it’s quite a bit further away.

I think a lot of those Lewis zoned RV students were attending WSHS already, so that rezoning did decrease WSHS enrollment, even if the Thru numbers didn't show it.

Just drive around and look at the WSHS car magnets in those areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we assuming Hunt Valley will be a split feeder? They could reshuffle the other ES’s feeding into SCMS. Duds like Saratoga could take more kids. Newington is packed but they could reshuffle the south side of that zone.

Yep. Saratoga currently at 75% can take whatever excess from the neighboring newington. Easy peasy.

But Saratoga is already taking that RV split feeder, which surprisingly had over 100 students in it. I hadnt realized that area was so large. That puts Saratoga at 91% per their calculations. They could take a few more students, but not enough to put all or most of HV south of the Parkway at Newington Forest. Especially with NFES projected at 101% after they get ~40 from the Sangster island.

Halley has capacity after dumping their island to Lorton Station/Hayfield - but it’s quite a bit further away.

I think a lot of those Lewis zoned RV students were attending WSHS already, so that rezoning did decrease WSHS enrollment, even if the Thru numbers didn't show it.

Just drive around and look at the WSHS car magnets in those areas.

That is also true - many people would simply move during later elementary in order to stay in the WS pyramid. And that area turns over fairly often anyway with military families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can they point to anything they’ve proposed that would actually help ensure equitable access to programs or minimize travel time for students?

All they’ve really done is punch down and propose to make some random changes to replace one ugly map with another ugly map. I mean, look at the proposed new Chantilly boundaries - they look absurd.

They clearly don’t have the courage to do what they originally set out to do and should just call the whole thing off.

It’s clear that they’ve considered those factors. There is a difference between having considered those factors vs. having considered them with the lens that you want to apply them.

Sounds more like you are just pleased they ignored them. Where’s the proof they were considered other than blanket assertions?

It’s in their slides. They’ve considered those factors.

A blanket assertion in the slides that they considered those factors doesn’t cut it. Reid is failing to take steps to comply with the policy adopted by the SB.