FCPS HS Boundary

[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.

Very, very few districts rezone every 5 years.

Rezoning is bad for students, bad for schools and bad for property owners.

Don't kid yourself by claiming what the school board is proposing is commonplace. It is not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

We shall see. Changing school boundaries is the most contentious thing an SB can do unless it is instigated by the community. Moving some kids from one good school to another will be received with ruffled feathers and consternation. Moving kids from a top performing school to a poorly performing school will be met with outright revolts, especially in the communities we all are discussing. If the SB and the superintendent are smart, they will tinker with similarly performing schools. If not, they can probably kiss their further political ambitions goodbye.

I hope at least one is brave enough to do what is right over any potential future political career. They need to look at the situation without political agendas (social Justice or protecting mainly the interests of rich supporting constituents). Get FCPS back on track .

* Start by sending the 230 Lewis students back to their zoned school, then see how that works for a few years before considering rezoning.

* Use accurate numbers, not grossly inflated estimates.

[Anonymous]

Lots of assumptions being made about who does and doesn't support adjustments. This is going to be akin to the common "boomer" vs. new generation conflict. As usual, older folks want to maintain what they feel they rightfully deserve, and younger families want a slice of the same pie.

There are a lot of young, very well-educated families who are completely priced out of top 10 schools. You bet they support boundary changes that make more schools acceptable and affordable. You'd be crazy not to in that position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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!

1,300 people is smaller then Lewis HS. A good percentage of those members are there just to see what people are saying about the changes and are not actual supporters. The social media posts they made to share have not been seen in any of the local groups that I am a member in. The go fund me for legal action is not close to being funded nor is the amount they are asking for close to what it will cost to sue. Most of the posts are made by admin.

So yeah, is is a small group that does not seem to be positioned to be all that influential.

As opposed to the literal handful of supporters of the boundary study.

I really do wonder if the school board considers the ramifications of what they are about to do. Big implications for the Democratic Party here, especially on the state wide and potentially national level. As much as the handful of vocal advocates here wished that people don’t care about school pyramids, they absolutely do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of assumptions being made about who does and doesn't support adjustments. This is going to be akin to the common "boomer" vs. new generation conflict. As usual, older folks want to maintain what they feel they rightfully deserve, and younger families want a slice of the same pie.

There are a lot of young, very well-educated families who are completely priced out of top 10 schools. You bet they support boundary changes that make more schools acceptable and affordable. You'd be crazy not to in that position.

Hahaha. Yeah, the county has been too good at making itself a desirable place to live.

Literally the dumbest thing I’ve heard on this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of assumptions being made about who does and doesn't support adjustments. This is going to be akin to the common "boomer" vs. new generation conflict. As usual, older folks want to maintain what they feel they rightfully deserve, and younger families want a slice of the same pie.

There are a lot of young, very well-educated families who are completely priced out of top 10 schools. You bet they support boundary changes that make more schools acceptable and affordable. You'd be crazy not to in that position.

No way lol. I’m in the eastern part of the county, I’m priced out of the “top 10 schools” whatever those are, but all those schools except maybe WSHS(?) are totally on the other side of the county from me. And they wouldn’t work for our commutes. What do Langley and McLean and Herndon schools have to do with me? Nothing. So I support them staying at their current schools. I would like to stay at my current schools too, even though a lot of people on here would Pooh-pooh them. But we’re in the walk zone for ES and a reasonable bus ride for MS/HS, NOT a bus across school zones that could take upwards of 30 minutes in traffic.

[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.

It’s a case of the SB winning the battle by pushing this now and possibly losing the war.

For example, in a place like Dranesville, if the net result of all this is to invest nothing in McLean, which continues to need an addition, but redistrict a lot of Langley and McLean kids to other schools it’s the end of Jimmy Bierman’s political career. He’ll be seen as a weak do-nothing who hid behind his seat on the BOS and let Robyn Lady get away with screwing many constituents.

If you think I’m exaggerating, look at the one School Board member who has now pivoted sharply to the center (and clearly has larger political ambitions) - Ryan McElveen. He knows exactly how toxic this may turn out.

Similiarly, Karl Frisch, who has larger political ambitions, is keeping as quiet as possible about all this. He’s more than happy to let Lady, McDaniel, Anderson, and Dunne take the lead in talking about the merits of Policy 8130 revisions and a county-wide redistricting and take the hits right now. That will work for him until it doesn’t.

I would agree it needs a renovation. It does not *need* an addition. There are seats available in the county and boundaries can be adjusted. There does not *need* to be any more expansions. McLean May *want* an addition, but the county cannot afford it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

1,300 people is smaller then Lewis HS. A good percentage of those members are there just to see what people are saying about the changes and are not actual supporters. The social media posts they made to share have not been seen in any of the local groups that I am a member in. The go fund me for legal action is not close to being funded nor is the amount they are asking for close to what it will cost to sue. Most of the posts are made by admin.

So yeah, is is a small group that does not seem to be positioned to be all that influential.

As opposed to the literal handful of supporters of the boundary study.

I really do wonder if the school board considers the ramifications of what they are about to do. Big implications for the Democratic Party here, especially on the state wide and potentially national level. As much as the handful of vocal advocates here wished that people don’t care about school pyramids, they absolutely do.

The supporters don't have to organize to do anything because the School Board is doing something. They can send their emails and call their School Board member and say they appreciate the change. They don't need to raise funds for law suits or develop literature. The School Board is going to proceed with the plan and the boundaries are going to shift.

How many parents are really upset about this the the schools that are most likely to be affected? We hear from the most vocal opponents here but I suspect that those opponents don't fully speak for the entire community. I would bet that the parents who are safely within the school boundaries could careless what happens to the parents on the edge of the boundary. There might even be parents who are well within the boundaries who want the changes to happen to relieve overcrowding at the school. Their house isn't going to drop in value and their kids are not moving so they at best don't care and at worst would like to see it happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lots of assumptions being made about who does and doesn't support adjustments. This is going to be akin to the common "boomer" vs. new generation conflict. As usual, older folks want to maintain what they feel they rightfully deserve, and younger families want a slice of the same pie.

There are a lot of young, very well-educated families who are completely priced out of top 10 schools. You bet they support boundary changes that make more schools acceptable and affordable. You'd be crazy not to in that position.

Could you provide a few examples of what you think will happen to achieve this result? For example, does Lewis somehow leapfrog 10 other schools to join the ranks of the “top 10” if one WS feeder gets moved there?

The SB has very much tied this redistricting scheme to efficiency, not equity, so I’m thinking you’ll likely be very disappointed by what happens. In some cases, current top 10 schools may become less, not more, accessible.

In fact, the happiest folks with this approach may be the boomers you despise, who may see lower tax increases if FCPS stops investing in its school buildings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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!

1,300 people is smaller then Lewis HS. A good percentage of those members are there just to see what people are saying about the changes and are not actual supporters. The social media posts they made to share have not been seen in any of the local groups that I am a member in. The go fund me for legal action is not close to being funded nor is the amount they are asking for close to what it will cost to sue. Most of the posts are made by admin.

So yeah, is is a small group that does not seem to be positioned to be all that influential.

As opposed to the literal handful of supporters of the boundary study.

I really do wonder if the school board considers the ramifications of what they are about to do. Big implications for the Democratic Party here, especially on the state wide and potentially national level. As much as the handful of vocal advocates here wished that people don’t care about school pyramids, they absolutely do.

Not sure this has national implications BUT I agree it has big local implications. I have never voted for a GOP candidate in my life (state, local or federal), but I would vote for one tomorrow if he/she opposed boundary adjustments. People move to the burb FOR THE SCHOOLS; it certainly is not for the night life or walkability. Maybe I should call the Fairfax Dems to let them know they have members playing with dynamite.

[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.

It’s a case of the SB winning the battle by pushing this now and possibly losing the war.

For example, in a place like Dranesville, if the net result of all this is to invest nothing in McLean, which continues to need an addition, but redistrict a lot of Langley and McLean kids to other schools it’s the end of Jimmy Bierman’s political career. He’ll be seen as a weak do-nothing who hid behind his seat on the BOS and let Robyn Lady get away with screwing many constituents.

If you think I’m exaggerating, look at the one School Board member who has now pivoted sharply to the center (and clearly has larger political ambitions) - Ryan McElveen. He knows exactly how toxic this may turn out.

Similiarly, Karl Frisch, who has larger political ambitions, is keeping as quiet as possible about all this. He’s more than happy to let Lady, McDaniel, Anderson, and Dunne take the lead in talking about the merits of Policy 8130 revisions and a county-wide redistricting and take the hits right now. That will work for him until it doesn’t.

I would agree it needs a renovation. It does not *need* an addition. There are seats available in the county and boundaries can be adjusted. There does not *need* to be any more expansions. McLean May *want* an addition, but the county cannot afford it.

Weird hill to die on. There probably isn’t another high school in the county that needs an addition more, when you consider that it has under 2000 permanent seats and serves multiple areas where the county is prioritizing residential growth.

In any event, when the consequence of stiffing McLean becomes clear - and many of the areas that account for diversity at the school get moved to Langley and Falls Church - don’t come back whining about it not having its “fair share” of FARMS kids.

[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.

It’s a case of the SB winning the battle by pushing this now and possibly losing the war.

For example, in a place like Dranesville, if the net result of all this is to invest nothing in McLean, which continues to need an addition, but redistrict a lot of Langley and McLean kids to other schools it’s the end of Jimmy Bierman’s political career. He’ll be seen as a weak do-nothing who hid behind his seat on the BOS and let Robyn Lady get away with screwing many constituents.

If you think I’m exaggerating, look at the one School Board member who has now pivoted sharply to the center (and clearly has larger political ambitions) - Ryan McElveen. He knows exactly how toxic this may turn out.

Similiarly, Karl Frisch, who has larger political ambitions, is keeping as quiet as possible about all this. He’s more than happy to let Lady, McDaniel, Anderson, and Dunne take the lead in talking about the merits of Policy 8130 revisions and a county-wide redistricting and take the hits right now. That will work for him until it doesn’t.

I would agree it needs a renovation. It does not *need* an addition. There are seats available in the county and boundaries can be adjusted. There does not *need* to be any more expansions. McLean May *want* an addition, but the county cannot afford it.

Weird hill to die on. There probably isn’t another high school in the county that needs an addition more, when you consider that it has under 2000 permanent seats and serves multiple areas where the county is prioritizing residential growth.

In any event, when the consequence of stiffing McLean becomes clear - and many of the areas that account for diversity at the school get moved to Langley and Falls Church - don’t come back whining about it not having its “fair share” of FARMS kids.

+1. Kill the unnecessary Dunn Loring ES project, build an addition to McLean, and keep it at least somewhat diverse. Win/win.

[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.

No, it doesn't need to be done that way at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fcps desperately needs more dedicated special ed classrooms. They have a huge number of kids without school placements right now just sitting at home. Empty one of these underutilized high school biildings and turn it into a special ed center.

This is a really good idea. FCPS lost access to many private day schools after the seclusion lawsuit. They have hundreds of kids sitting at home waiting for a school placement because they do not have anywhere for these kids to go. Turn one of these underenrolled high schools into a special ed center.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fcps desperately needs more dedicated special ed classrooms. They have a huge number of kids without school placements right now just sitting at home. Empty one of these underutilized high school biildings and turn it into a special ed center.

This is a really good idea. FCPS lost access to many private day schools after the seclusion lawsuit. They have hundreds of kids sitting at home waiting for a school placement because they do not have anywhere for these kids to go. Turn one of these underenrolled high schools into a special ed center.

If they were going to do this better to do it with an under-enrolled elementary school. Less disruptive.