FCPS HS Boundary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of saber rattling by Langley parents at the board meeting last night threatening litigation if the School Board adopts revisions to the boundary policy.

They are the definition of “privilege hoarders” and they should be ordered to pay FCPS’s legal fees if they do bring a frivolous lawsuit.

I heard it way differently than your spin. But I guess to someone who is a trying to foment class warfare, you gotta spin it your way.

It’s really sad how much some folks on this board hate their neighbors based on a perception that didn’t even align with reality.

Be well.

The head of the Langley group definitely made veiled threats last night about litigation if the board adopts the policy revisions later this month.

They are bullies who don’t care about anyone else and can’t believe they might not always get their way.

It’s actually not a Langley group, but you know that already, just trying to add your spin to the SB’s unpopular policies.

Your definition of bullying is really weird -not sure when advocating for all of Fairfax county kids became bullying.

These people don’t advocate for kids in our pyramid. It’s mostly Langley parents advocating for Great Falls to stay out of Herndon with a few West Springfield parents along for the ride.

You are just straight up lying. The group includes members across the county and invites everyone in the county to join.

You are just making assumptions based on your own prejudices and biases.

The FB group is small and spends most of its time asking for money for eventual law suits. There might be more active school specific FB groups but those are also likely to be small. And the people who mention what school their kids are in or will attend tend to be SHS and Langley. The people who are most upset about this and are most vocal about it tend to be from those specific schools. the Oakton, Centerville, Chantilly, SLHS parents I know don't seem to be all that worried. Most think that something needs to be done because of over crowding.

[Anonymous]

SHS = WSHS, missed a letter. Sorry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do the 60% of voters who don't have school age children care as much about redistricting- in favor or against? The 40% who do are probably split on boundary policy. If the SB does it sooner rather than later- they spin- we got it done- limited disruption, more efficient and saved tax payers $. I don't think you would see a republican takeover- of the SB or a successful recall effort. Litigation wise - it won't work to stop a boundary policy.

Oh they will care. The effected homes would lose $100-200k in value overnight. If you are trying to move the equivalent of an entire elementary school, call it ~1,000 homes give or take. That is $100-200 million in home equity destroyed to save expansion/renovation costs for a good school (which will eventually need to be spent anyway because the county will eventually grow because that is how civilizations work).

There is a reason boundary adjustments are the third rail for school boards. It effects people kids and their largest financial investment, at the same time. It is political suicide in the districts where the changes happen unless the community supports it. I 100% guaranty another democrat will run against them in the election (in addition to a republican).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of saber rattling by Langley parents at the board meeting last night threatening litigation if the School Board adopts revisions to the boundary policy.

They are the definition of “privilege hoarders” and they should be ordered to pay FCPS’s legal fees if they do bring a frivolous lawsuit.

I heard it way differently than your spin. But I guess to someone who is a trying to foment class warfare, you gotta spin it your way.

It’s really sad how much some folks on this board hate their neighbors based on a perception that didn’t even align with reality.

Be well.

The head of the Langley group definitely made veiled threats last night about litigation if the board adopts the policy revisions later this month.

They are bullies who don’t care about anyone else and can’t believe they might not always get their way.

It’s actually not a Langley group, but you know that already, just trying to add your spin to the SB’s unpopular policies.

Your definition of bullying is really weird -not sure when advocating for all of Fairfax county kids became bullying.

These people don’t advocate for kids in our pyramid. It’s mostly Langley parents advocating for Great Falls to stay out of Herndon with a few West Springfield parents along for the ride.

You are just straight up lying. The group includes members across the county and invites everyone in the county to join.

You are just making assumptions based on your own prejudices and biases.

Of course they invite other people to join their group to try and give them more credibility but those behind the group and calling the shots are Great Falls parents seeking to avoid a redistricting to Herndon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of saber rattling by Langley parents at the board meeting last night threatening litigation if the School Board adopts revisions to the boundary policy.

They are the definition of “privilege hoarders” and they should be ordered to pay FCPS’s legal fees if they do bring a frivolous lawsuit.

I heard it way differently than your spin. But I guess to someone who is a trying to foment class warfare, you gotta spin it your way.

It’s really sad how much some folks on this board hate their neighbors based on a perception that didn’t even align with reality.

Be well.

The head of the Langley group definitely made veiled threats last night about litigation if the board adopts the policy revisions later this month.

They are bullies who don’t care about anyone else and can’t believe they might not always get their way.

It’s actually not a Langley group, but you know that already, just trying to add your spin to the SB’s unpopular policies.

Your definition of bullying is really weird -not sure when advocating for all of Fairfax county kids became bullying.

This is hilarious. Yes, great falls folks are well known for their concern about others in the county.

Welcome back, SJW! Did you go somewhere nice for your summer vacation?

Ah, the name caller is back!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the 60% of voters who don't have school age children care as much about redistricting- in favor or against? The 40% who do are probably split on boundary policy. If the SB does it sooner rather than later- they spin- we got it done- limited disruption, more efficient and saved tax payers $. I don't think you would see a republican takeover- of the SB or a successful recall effort. Litigation wise - it won't work to stop a boundary policy.

Oh they will care. The effected homes would lose $100-200k in value overnight. If you are trying to move the equivalent of an entire elementary school, call it ~1,000 homes give or take. That is $100-200 million in home equity destroyed to save expansion/renovation costs for a good school (which will eventually need to be spent anyway because the county will eventually grow because that is how civilizations work).

There is a reason boundary adjustments are the third rail for school boards. It effects people kids and their largest financial investment, at the same time. It is political suicide in the districts where the changes happen unless the community supports it. I 100% guaranty another democrat will run against them in the election (in addition to a republican).

This is why many districts do regular boundary reviews for the whole district. Just like FCPS is trying to do. The current system means everyone avoids the issue or makes small changes that have ripple affects for others. This work needs to be done regularly without all the political influence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Litigation can drag any changes out for years and make it a county wide issue. I would assume that along with litigation, they will pressure their county reps and state reps to oppose boundary changes.

How well did that work out for the people who sued over being sent to South Lakes back in 2008? The board posts from today could be carbon copies of the ones back then. Lots of whinging and threats to send their kids to private school, with nothing but a whimper as the court cases all failed to change any of it.

The School Board member behind the 2008 South Lakes redistricting (Stu Gibson) cut a deal with the member then representing Langley and Herndon (Janie Strauss) to keep those schools out of the 2008 boundary study.

This will be quite different because this time Langley will be one of the most obvious targets for redistricting and they show up with tanks and guns (hired guns).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of saber rattling by Langley parents at the board meeting last night threatening litigation if the School Board adopts revisions to the boundary policy.

They are the definition of “privilege hoarders” and they should be ordered to pay FCPS’s legal fees if they do bring a frivolous lawsuit.

I heard it way differently than your spin. But I guess to someone who is a trying to foment class warfare, you gotta spin it your way.

It’s really sad how much some folks on this board hate their neighbors based on a perception that didn’t even align with reality.

Be well.

The head of the Langley group definitely made veiled threats last night about litigation if the board adopts the policy revisions later this month.

They are bullies who don’t care about anyone else and can’t believe they might not always get their way.

It’s actually not a Langley group, but you know that already, just trying to add your spin to the SB’s unpopular policies.

Your definition of bullying is really weird -not sure when advocating for all of Fairfax county kids became bullying.

These people don’t advocate for kids in our pyramid. It’s mostly Langley parents advocating for Great Falls to stay out of Herndon with a few West Springfield parents along for the ride.

You are just straight up lying. The group includes members across the county and invites everyone in the county to join.

You are just making assumptions based on your own prejudices and biases.

The FB group is small and spends most of its time asking for money for eventual law suits. There might be more active school specific FB groups but those are also likely to be small. And the people who mention what school their kids are in or will attend tend to be SHS and Langley. The people who are most upset about this and are most vocal about it tend to be from those specific schools. the Oakton, Centerville, Chantilly, SLHS parents I know don't seem to be all that worried. Most think that something needs to be done because of over crowding.

1,300 doesn’t strike me a a particularly small FB group, but do go on.

And the reason others at those schools seem indifferent is because they are ill-informed about the actual intentions of this school board where they are seeking to reset the entire map.

The school board staff poster seems to be very active this morning!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the 60% of voters who don't have school age children care as much about redistricting- in favor or against? The 40% who do are probably split on boundary policy. If the SB does it sooner rather than later- they spin- we got it done- limited disruption, more efficient and saved tax payers $. I don't think you would see a republican takeover- of the SB or a successful recall effort. Litigation wise - it won't work to stop a boundary policy.

Oh they will care. The effected homes would lose $100-200k in value overnight. If you are trying to move the equivalent of an entire elementary school, call it ~1,000 homes give or take. That is $100-200 million in home equity destroyed to save expansion/renovation costs for a good school (which will eventually need to be spent anyway because the county will eventually grow because that is how civilizations work).

There is a reason boundary adjustments are the third rail for school boards. It effects people kids and their largest financial investment, at the same time. It is political suicide in the districts where the changes happen unless the community supports it. I 100% guaranty another democrat will run against them in the election (in addition to a republican).

This is why many districts do regular boundary reviews for the whole district. Just like FCPS is trying to do. The current system means everyone avoids the issue or makes small changes that have ripple affects for others. This work needs to be done regularly without all the political influence.

The whole “ripple effects” argument is a red herring. If boundary changes have unintended consequences it’s because they were flawed from the inception. Making more boundary changes at the same time could just as easily multiply the mistakes as mitigate them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of saber rattling by Langley parents at the board meeting last night threatening litigation if the School Board adopts revisions to the boundary policy.

They are the definition of “privilege hoarders” and they should be ordered to pay FCPS’s legal fees if they do bring a frivolous lawsuit.

I heard it way differently than your spin. But I guess to someone who is a trying to foment class warfare, you gotta spin it your way.

It’s really sad how much some folks on this board hate their neighbors based on a perception that didn’t even align with reality.

Be well.

The head of the Langley group definitely made veiled threats last night about litigation if the board adopts the policy revisions later this month.

They are bullies who don’t care about anyone else and can’t believe they might not always get their way.

It’s actually not a Langley group, but you know that already, just trying to add your spin to the SB’s unpopular policies.

Your definition of bullying is really weird -not sure when advocating for all of Fairfax county kids became bullying.

These people don’t advocate for kids in our pyramid. It’s mostly Langley parents advocating for Great Falls to stay out of Herndon with a few West Springfield parents along for the ride.

You are just straight up lying. The group includes members across the county and invites everyone in the county to join.

You are just making assumptions based on your own prejudices and biases.

The FB group is small and spends most of its time asking for money for eventual law suits. There might be more active school specific FB groups but those are also likely to be small. And the people who mention what school their kids are in or will attend tend to be SHS and Langley. The people who are most upset about this and are most vocal about it tend to be from those specific schools. the Oakton, Centerville, Chantilly, SLHS parents I know don't seem to be all that worried. Most think that something needs to be done because of over crowding.

1,300 doesn’t strike me a a particularly small FB group, but do go on.

And the reason others at those schools seem indifferent is because they are ill-informed about the actual intentions of this school board where they are seeking to reset the entire map.

The school board staff poster seems to be very active this morning!

It’s probably about 15 active posters, 275 supporters, and 1000 people there with popcorn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of saber rattling by Langley parents at the board meeting last night threatening litigation if the School Board adopts revisions to the boundary policy.

They are the definition of “privilege hoarders” and they should be ordered to pay FCPS’s legal fees if they do bring a frivolous lawsuit.

I heard it way differently than your spin. But I guess to someone who is a trying to foment class warfare, you gotta spin it your way.

It’s really sad how much some folks on this board hate their neighbors based on a perception that didn’t even align with reality.

Be well.

The head of the Langley group definitely made veiled threats last night about litigation if the board adopts the policy revisions later this month.

They are bullies who don’t care about anyone else and can’t believe they might not always get their way.

It’s actually not a Langley group, but you know that already, just trying to add your spin to the SB’s unpopular policies.

Your definition of bullying is really weird -not sure when advocating for all of Fairfax county kids became bullying.

These people don’t advocate for kids in our pyramid. It’s mostly Langley parents advocating for Great Falls to stay out of Herndon with a few West Springfield parents along for the ride.

You are just straight up lying. The group includes members across the county and invites everyone in the county to join.

You are just making assumptions based on your own prejudices and biases.

The FB group is small and spends most of its time asking for money for eventual law suits. There might be more active school specific FB groups but those are also likely to be small. And the people who mention what school their kids are in or will attend tend to be SHS and Langley. The people who are most upset about this and are most vocal about it tend to be from those specific schools. the Oakton, Centerville, Chantilly, SLHS parents I know don't seem to be all that worried. Most think that something needs to be done because of over crowding.

1,300 doesn’t strike me a a particularly small FB group, but do go on.

And the reason others at those schools seem indifferent is because they are ill-informed about the actual intentions of this school board where they are seeking to reset the entire map.

The school board staff poster seems to be very active this morning!

This is such a typical great falls response. Not everyone has the same opinion as you do. And we are not school board members or staff or gatehouse. We are just parents, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the 60% of voters who don't have school age children care as much about redistricting- in favor or against? The 40% who do are probably split on boundary policy. If the SB does it sooner rather than later- they spin- we got it done- limited disruption, more efficient and saved tax payers $. I don't think you would see a republican takeover- of the SB or a successful recall effort. Litigation wise - it won't work to stop a boundary policy.

Oh they will care. The effected homes would lose $100-200k in value overnight. If you are trying to move the equivalent of an entire elementary school, call it ~1,000 homes give or take. That is $100-200 million in home equity destroyed to save expansion/renovation costs for a good school (which will eventually need to be spent anyway because the county will eventually grow because that is how civilizations work).

How well-versed are you in human geography? I would support whatever it is that experts in their fields support. FPAC is a committee of such external experts and even they have stated support of boundary changes in their guidance.

Listening to emotional laymen at community participation who primarily care about their bottom line and their own situation should not hold much weight because they are effectively the equivalent of an anecdote.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the 60% of voters who don't have school age children care as much about redistricting- in favor or against? The 40% who do are probably split on boundary policy. If the SB does it sooner rather than later- they spin- we got it done- limited disruption, more efficient and saved tax payers $. I don't think you would see a republican takeover- of the SB or a successful recall effort. Litigation wise - it won't work to stop a boundary policy.

Oh they will care. The effected homes would lose $100-200k in value overnight. If you are trying to move the equivalent of an entire elementary school, call it ~1,000 homes give or take. That is $100-200 million in home equity destroyed to save expansion/renovation costs for a good school (which will eventually need to be spent anyway because the county will eventually grow because that is how civilizations work).

There is a reason boundary adjustments are the third rail for school boards. It effects people kids and their largest financial investment, at the same time. It is political suicide in the districts where the changes happen unless the community supports it. I 100% guaranty another democrat will run against them in the election (in addition to a republican).

This is why many districts do regular boundary reviews for the whole district. Just like FCPS is trying to do. The current system means everyone avoids the issue or makes small changes that have ripple affects for others. This work needs to be done regularly without all the political influence.

This is simply not accurate. Most districts DO NOT adjust boundaries regularly or even at all, unless a community is asking for it. Most districts expand facilities to accommodate students as well performing schools and shut down poor performing schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the 60% of voters who don't have school age children care as much about redistricting- in favor or against? The 40% who do are probably split on boundary policy. If the SB does it sooner rather than later- they spin- we got it done- limited disruption, more efficient and saved tax payers $. I don't think you would see a republican takeover- of the SB or a successful recall effort. Litigation wise - it won't work to stop a boundary policy.

Oh they will care. The effected homes would lose $100-200k in value overnight. If you are trying to move the equivalent of an entire elementary school, call it ~1,000 homes give or take. That is $100-200 million in home equity destroyed to save expansion/renovation costs for a good school (which will eventually need to be spent anyway because the county will eventually grow because that is how civilizations work).

How well-versed are you in human geography? I would support whatever it is that experts in their fields support. FPAC is a committee of such external experts and even they have stated support of boundary changes in their guidance.

Listening to emotional laymen at community participation who primarily care about their bottom line and their own situation should not hold much weight because they are effectively the equivalent of an anecdote.

I'm just saying that Fairfax Co is projected to grow by 200,000 people in the next 25 years, so ... school expansions and construction are inevitable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do the 60% of voters who don't have school age children care as much about redistricting- in favor or against? The 40% who do are probably split on boundary policy. If the SB does it sooner rather than later- they spin- we got it done- limited disruption, more efficient and saved tax payers $. I don't think you would see a republican takeover- of the SB or a successful recall effort. Litigation wise - it won't work to stop a boundary policy.

Oh they will care. The effected homes would lose $100-200k in value overnight. If you are trying to move the equivalent of an entire elementary school, call it ~1,000 homes give or take. That is $100-200 million in home equity destroyed to save expansion/renovation costs for a good school (which will eventually need to be spent anyway because the county will eventually grow because that is how civilizations work).

There is a reason boundary adjustments are the third rail for school boards. It effects people kids and their largest financial investment, at the same time. It is political suicide in the districts where the changes happen unless the community supports it. I 100% guaranty another democrat will run against them in the election (in addition to a republican).

This is why many districts do regular boundary reviews for the whole district. Just like FCPS is trying to do. The current system means everyone avoids the issue or makes small changes that have ripple affects for others. This work needs to be done regularly without all the political influence.

This is simply not accurate. Most districts DO NOT adjust boundaries regularly or even at all, unless a community is asking for it. Most districts expand facilities to accommodate students as well performing schools and shut down poor performing schools.

school systems adjust boundaries as infrequently as they can. FCPS is no different. They have kicked the can down the road as far as they can for as long as they could. It’s time and it’s going to be over the entire county and in all levels of education. We desperately need a reset. This is it.

The only school systems I know (including FCPS) shut schools when the student population decreases. I haven’t heard of a school that was shut down for that was shut down for poor performance as the main reason, let alone it being practiced by “most” school systems. Although, I am sure there is an example somewhere that you will dig up.