FCPS School Board candidates in Dranesville

[Anonymous]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqSNG8XzdIg

The best thing Hynes could have done for her buddy Elaine is NOT endorse her. But, good to know what she actually thinks. They have worked together so it's certainly an opinion based on interaction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqSNG8XzdIg

The best thing Hynes could have done for her buddy Elaine is NOT endorse her. But, good to know what she actually thinks. They have worked together so it's certainly an opinion based on interaction.

Meh. Hynes doesn't represent Dranesville. The worst thing Karloutsos has done has been to tout her endorsement from One Great Falls/Voices of Fairfax.

"Thank you Voices of Fairfax for the endorsement! I applaud all the dedicated citizens who spoke up, mobilized and took action. I look forward to working with all of you on the road to victory! #ChangeTheBoardNotTheBoundaries"

I wonder why she thinks Herndon voters would support someone endorsed by a group whose members showed up at a rally at Forestville ES in Great Falls and called Herndon gang-ridden and dangerous, or why she thinks McLean voters would vote for someone who doesn't want to "ChengeThe Boundaries"?

[Anonymous]

As the Washington Post said:

"The Democratic and Republican parties each endorsed a slate, which is not unusual. What is out of the norm is the poisonous tone that, by and large, has been set by the Republican-backed candidates.

They seem to have taken a page from President Trump’s playbook of trafficking in fear, misinformation and demonization. “Take back our schools” is their theme in a campaign that distorts the reality of Fairfax schools and the work of the current board. The 190,000-student system faces challenges — including retaining teachers, narrowing the achievement gap and modernizing overcrowded facilities — but the high-performing system is among the country’s best. Contrary to GOP claims, no one is proposing lowered standards or massive, cross-county busing. Attacking the board for renaming J.E.B. Stuart High School to Justice High, updating the sexual health curriculum to include lessons about transgender issues and seeking to promote equity is wedge politics at its worst."

[Anonymous]

What do the Republicans think about the need for overcrowding relief at McLean HS? All you need to do is check their votes.

"I move to amend the FY2020-2024 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by including Langley and McLean High Schools on the list of Priority Recommended Boundary Adjustments, as noted on page 46 of the CIP.

Motion by Jane K Strauss, second by Ryan McElveen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yes: Jane K Strauss, Patricia Hynes, Karen A Keys-Gamarra, Karen Corbett Sanders - Chair, Tamara D Kaufax - Vice Chair, Megan McLaughlin, Ryan McElveen, Sandra S Evans, Ilryong Moon
No: Tom Wilson
Abstain: Elizabeth Schultz"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do the Republicans think about the need for overcrowding relief at McLean HS? All you need to do is check their votes.

"I move to amend the FY2020-2024 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by including Langley and McLean High Schools on the list of Priority Recommended Boundary Adjustments, as noted on page 46 of the CIP.

Motion by Jane K Strauss, second by Ryan McElveen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yes: Jane K Strauss, Patricia Hynes, Karen A Keys-Gamarra, Karen Corbett Sanders - Chair, Tamara D Kaufax - Vice Chair, Megan McLaughlin, Ryan McElveen, Sandra S Evans, Ilryong Moon
No: Tom Wilson
Abstain: Elizabeth Schultz"

I read the Washington Post article PP have quoted. The comments are better than the article with McLaughlin -D-Braddock participating. Why did those 2 not vote yes? They knew it would pass and why it was an agenda item. Excuse me but for how many CIP's did staff recommend a boundary change ? 2 or 3. It made p 46 because of the election not an endeavor for resource stewardship. D's don't want to lose Dranesville and want to keep the 3 at large seats. It's protection for Keys Gamarra who would not have voted yes in Jan 2019.

The at large members and any with resource stewardship as a priority should have had unfriendly amendments to cancel the West Potomac addition. McLaughlin WP comments are prattle about capacity needs for growth in Tysons and the route 1 corridor. How stupid do they think we are? Does McLaughlin want to take one for the team? I can't vote for or against her but reading her comments on the WP just made us decide to vote at large R.

Storck and Mckay said it wasn't needed - perception of schools has impacted boundary changes. What's open utilization at Lee and Mount Vernon? The word is massive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqSNG8XzdIg

The best thing Hynes could have done for her buddy Elaine is NOT endorse her. But, good to know what she actually thinks. They have worked together so it's certainly an opinion based on interaction.

This election is beyond boundaries since the FCSB hired a boundary consultant to present after the bond referendum. Hynes has undercapacity schools that could have alleviated need to build, Corbett Sanders and Co have demolished the integrity of the bond projects...

Exactly why would VA provide FCPS with additional funding when FCSB flagrantly and publicly wastes funds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do the Republicans think about the need for overcrowding relief at McLean HS? All you need to do is check their votes.

"I move to amend the FY2020-2024 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by including Langley and McLean High Schools on the list of Priority Recommended Boundary Adjustments, as noted on page 46 of the CIP.

Motion by Jane K Strauss, second by Ryan McElveen.
Final Resolution: Motion Carries
Yes: Jane K Strauss, Patricia Hynes, Karen A Keys-Gamarra, Karen Corbett Sanders - Chair, Tamara D Kaufax - Vice Chair, Megan McLaughlin, Ryan McElveen, Sandra S Evans, Ilryong Moon
No: Tom Wilson
Abstain: Elizabeth Schultz"

I read the Washington Post article PP have quoted. The comments are better than the article with McLaughlin -D-Braddock participating. Why did those 2 not vote yes? They knew it would pass and why it was an agenda item. Excuse me but for how many CIP's did staff recommend a boundary change ? 2 or 3. It made p 46 because of the election not an endeavor for resource stewardship. D's don't want to lose Dranesville and want to keep the 3 at large seats. It's protection for Keys Gamarra who would not have voted yes in Jan 2019.

The at large members and any with resource stewardship as a priority should have had unfriendly amendments to cancel the West Potomac addition. McLaughlin WP comments are prattle about capacity needs for growth in Tysons and the route 1 corridor. How stupid do they think we are? Does McLaughlin want to take one for the team? I can't vote for or against her but reading her comments on the WP just made us decide to vote at large R.

Storck and Mckay said it wasn't needed - perception of schools has impacted boundary changes. What's open utilization at Lee and Mount Vernon? The word is massive.

Why the excuses? Schultz and Wilson want to keep McLean kids in trailers even though Langley is three miles away and under-enrolled. Their agenda was to keep Langley and McLean families upset and tell people in Springfield and Sully they gave schools in Dranesville their middle finger.

If that helps them in their districts, bully for them. But we sure won't be voting for Karloutsos or the at-large candidates endorsed by the Rs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the Washington Post said:

"The Democratic and Republican parties each endorsed a slate, which is not unusual. What is out of the norm is the poisonous tone that, by and large, has been set by the Republican-backed candidates.

They seem to have taken a page from President Trump’s playbook of trafficking in fear, misinformation and demonization. “Take back our schools” is their theme in a campaign that distorts the reality of Fairfax schools and the work of the current board. The 190,000-student system faces challenges — including retaining teachers, narrowing the achievement gap and modernizing overcrowded facilities — but the high-performing system is among the country’s best. Contrary to GOP claims, no one is proposing lowered standards or massive, cross-county busing. Attacking the board for renaming J.E.B. Stuart High School to Justice High, updating the sexual health curriculum to include lessons about transgender issues and seeking to promote equity is wedge politics at its worst."

The school board has no business doing those last three items. That's why they are being brought up. The school board should be apolitical

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As the Washington Post said:

"The Democratic and Republican parties each endorsed a slate, which is not unusual. What is out of the norm is the poisonous tone that, by and large, has been set by the Republican-backed candidates.

They seem to have taken a page from President Trump’s playbook of trafficking in fear, misinformation and demonization. “Take back our schools” is their theme in a campaign that distorts the reality of Fairfax schools and the work of the current board. The 190,000-student system faces challenges — including retaining teachers, narrowing the achievement gap and modernizing overcrowded facilities — but the high-performing system is among the country’s best. Contrary to GOP claims, no one is proposing lowered standards or massive, cross-county busing. Attacking the board for renaming J.E.B. Stuart High School to Justice High, updating the sexual health curriculum to include lessons about transgender issues and seeking to promote equity is wedge politics at its worst."

The school board has no business doing those last three items. That's why they are being brought up. The school board should be apolitical

Right. Like naming a school after a Confederate general in the 1950s after the Brown v. Board of Education was an apolitical act.

And the School Board has a key role to ensure that equal opportunities for students exist in FCPS and that LBGTQ students are not discriminated against.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqSNG8XzdIg

The best thing Hynes could have done for her buddy Elaine is NOT endorse her. But, good to know what she actually thinks. They have worked together so it's certainly an opinion based on interaction.

That video has a bunch of snippets that are taken completely out of context. It just proves the Rs are desperate and are using fear-mongering and misinformation to further their cause.

[Anonymous]

I believe the following is an honest assessment:

* In early 2019, the School Board was operating under the assumption that it would not add any more boundary studies to the CIP until it had, at a minimum, considered revisions to its policy governing boundary adjustments and, at most, had undertaken a county-wide redistricting to address capacity issues and adjust boundaries "through an equity based lens";

* At the same time, Janie Strauss offered a proposed amendment to the CIP to include a McLean/Langley boundary study that she had not taken the time to preview with most of her colleagues.

* As a result, Strauss's proposal did not get majority support and, therefore, was never put to a vote.

* The failure to amend the CIP led to the creation of McSpaces, which pressed the case for relief at McLean. The discussion of potential revisions to the boundary policies and individual school boundaries led to the creation of One Great Falls, which was primarily concerned with any potential adjustments that might send students from the Langley pyramid to the Herndon pyramid, but also attacked the idea that any adjustments to boundaries should take "equity" and/or the socio-economic composition of students or neighborhoods into account.

* While the School Board had additional conversations about potential revisions to its boundary policy, it was unable to agree upon those revisions and unwilling to wait until such revisions had been adopted before responding to the community pressure to address the McLean overcrowding. As a result, the School Board went ahead in September 2019 and approved a CIP amendment to authorize a McLean/Langley boundary study. This decision split entirely along political lines: all the Democrats supported the CIP amendment, and neither of the Republicans (Schultz and Wilson) supported it.

* The approval of the CIP amendment allows FCPS staff to move forward with the scoping of a boundary study that, if adopted next spring, could move some students from McLean to Langley as early as fall 2020.

* Those who believe it was appropriate for the School Board to go ahead and approve the CIP amendment and/or for the Board to continue its consideration of potential revisions to the boundary policy will tend to support Democratic candidates for the Dranesville and at-large seats (Tholen, Keys Gamarra, Omeish, Sizemore Heizer).

* Those who believe the CIP amendment was simply intended to mollify McLean parents before the election and/or are fearful about what could result from future revisions to the boundary policy will tend to support the other candidates for those positions (Karloutsos, Mobasheri, Buford, DeStefano, Palathingal).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe the following is an honest assessment:

* In early 2019, the School Board was operating under the assumption that it would not add any more boundary studies to the CIP until it had, at a minimum, considered revisions to its policy governing boundary adjustments and, at most, had undertaken a county-wide redistricting to address capacity issues and adjust boundaries "through an equity based lens";

* At the same time, Janie Strauss offered a proposed amendment to the CIP to include a McLean/Langley boundary study that she had not taken the time to preview with most of her colleagues.

* As a result, Strauss's proposal did not get majority support and, therefore, was never put to a vote.

* The failure to amend the CIP led to the creation of McSpaces, which pressed the case for relief at McLean. The discussion of potential revisions to the boundary policies and individual school boundaries led to the creation of One Great Falls, which was primarily concerned with any potential adjustments that might send students from the Langley pyramid to the Herndon pyramid, but also attacked the idea that any adjustments to boundaries should take "equity" and/or the socio-economic composition of students or neighborhoods into account.

* While the School Board had additional conversations about potential revisions to its boundary policy, it was unable to agree upon those revisions and unwilling to wait until such revisions had been adopted before responding to the community pressure to address the McLean overcrowding. As a result, the School Board went ahead in September 2019 and approved a CIP amendment to authorize a McLean/Langley boundary study. This decision split entirely along political lines: all the Democrats supported the CIP amendment, and neither of the Republicans (Schultz and Wilson) supported it.

* The approval of the CIP amendment allows FCPS staff to move forward with the scoping of a boundary study that, if adopted next spring, could move some students from McLean to Langley as early as fall 2020.

* Those who believe it was appropriate for the School Board to go ahead and approve the CIP amendment and/or for the Board to continue its consideration of potential revisions to the boundary policy will tend to support Democratic candidates for the Dranesville and at-large seats (Tholen, Keys Gamarra, Omeish, Sizemore Heizer).

* Those who believe the CIP amendment was simply intended to mollify McLean parents before the election and/or are fearful about what could result from future revisions to the boundary policy will tend to support the other candidates for those positions (Karloutsos, Mobasheri, Buford, DeStefano, Palathingal).

This is very helpful thanks.

Is there any reliable polling data? I’m starting to pull my hair out on who to vote for lol, and maybe if I know some people are shoo-ins it’ll make things easier to figure out. Thanks

[Anonymous]

What happened is parents paying attention close to an election.

We all remember Scott Brabrand coming to our emails unable to say "One Fairfax" when he had no problem talking about it at work sessions.

They planned to vote on boundary policy in September, with ZERO public input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What happened is parents paying attention close to an election.

We all remember Scott Brabrand coming to our emails unable to say "One Fairfax" when he had no problem talking about it at work sessions.

They planned to vote on boundary policy in September, with ZERO public input.

Sorry the 14:59 post is more informative.

[Anonymous]

I hate Trump and I almost always vote Democrat but I’m really thinking about going Republican. It’s not like they’re going to take over the board. But we need some counterweight to this one Fairfax stuff. And the independent candidate is not serious otherwise he would have backed off of his Great Falls first positions.