Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

For those that watched the meeting - was your sense they will approve this and then keep working on the other changes or make amendments now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those that watched the meeting - was your sense they will approve this and then keep working on the other changes or make amendments now?

Yes. Much of the meeting they spent the time congratulating each other on a job well done. Dunne and Moon asked some pretty pointed questions and Meren sounded like she had some amendments coming. And obviously Sandy Anderson is putting the entire WSHS area back into play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those that watched the meeting - was your sense they will approve this and then keep working on the other changes or make amendments now?

It will be approved and then additional changes might be proposed in between cycles. I don’t think there will be any curve balls in the amendments.

Perhaps they’ll hold off on some changes, like adding students to Chantilly when Western High School will be opt out for the next 2 years, meaning they could be exacerbating capacity issues for a few years.

Scaling back on Thoreau until AAP is added seems like another logical step, but they seem gung ho about moving as much of the Marshall/Vienna region to Madison as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone is watching...I feel horrible for region 4 (West Springfield). Their rep just said she is going to keep making changes over and over again. Watch out Hunt Valley, Daventry, Sangster, White Oaks, others??

Yes Sandy Anderson is going to put WSHS on the list of areas of concern which was at the end of the superintendent’s plan. She said she was disappointed no changes were made and more changes there need to be considered.

The original proposals had much of Hunt Valley south of the Parkway at South County, creating a split feeder out of HVES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone is watching...I feel horrible for region 4 (West Springfield). Their rep just said she is going to keep making changes over and over again. Watch out Hunt Valley, Daventry, Sangster, White Oaks, others??

Yes Sandy Anderson is going to put WSHS on the list of areas of concern which was at the end of the superintendent’s plan. She said she was disappointed no changes were made and more changes there need to be considered.

The original proposals had much of Hunt Valley south of the Parkway at South County, creating a split feeder out of HVES.

Yes. I think was was disappointed that Hunt Valley didn't move either, regardless of creating a split. It's hard to tell because she refuses to engage constructively with her constituents. During this whole process, she never initiated West Springfield specific meetings (outside of the poorly constructed ones by Thru) like other regional board members did, and had some very contentious zoom meetings with neighborhood who had to reach out to her office repeatedly. She helped to create a kill or be killed mentality for all of West Springfield which made neighborhood feel like they had to fight each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone is watching...I feel horrible for region 4 (West Springfield). Their rep just said she is going to keep making changes over and over again. Watch out Hunt Valley, Daventry, Sangster, White Oaks, others??

The members always have the right to propose amendments, but if it’s folks like Sandy Anderson proposing amendments it’s going to be really ugly because she’s spent months pretentiously lecturing people on how they had to trust the process and how not everything can be at once.

Why does she seem to hold so much disdain for her own constituents? This feels less like leadership and more like contempt for the very people she represents.

[Anonymous]

The Franconia reps comments were a huge disappointment. Just a long winded thank you. Mentioning that Lewis is a problem, but not giving any solutions to fix the problem.

[Anonymous]

I am a new poster this morning and am so happy to see that others agree with my thoughts on Sandy at the meeting last night.

It has been so frustrating to reach out to her time and time again with no response. The entire Boundary review was her pet project - specifically getting a few specific neighborhoods into WSHS. Is this because that's where her biggest doners live? I don't know about that, but she has mentioned more than once that was her goal.

I am glad she hears that none of us want anyone moved out of WS, but then why is she moving people IN and demanding to move people out to make room for them.

I strongly disagree with the idea that these amendments aren't going to be made public until the vote. That feels especially sneaky, I am hopeful I misunderstood and we will see them sooner rather than later.

Sandy and her posse need to go -- that includes the new candidate Tom Dannen. They follow her blindly without asking the questions necessary to make decisions for the good of the community, not just Sandys pet project.

If anyone has any Sandy lore to help me understand her position, I would love to hear it. She attended LBSS and lives in South County zone - why is she so pressed to screw with WS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How does this work going forward with the board and their amendments? Will we only find out about amendments when they’re introduced to the next meeting where the board votes on the changes? Or are they released in advance?

First, an agenda item gets posted in advance of the January 22nd meeting to approve Reid’s package of recommendations.

Then board members can offer amendments to her recommendations, which also are typically posted on Board Docs before the meeting (but sometimes only shortly before the meeting).

The amendments get voted on first, and then the package as amended gets voted on.

It will be a long meeting. Unless they adjust the schedule an amendment affecting someone’s neighborhood might not come up for discussion before 10 or 11 PM. The final vote might not be until after midnight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If anyone is watching...I feel horrible for region 4 (West Springfield). Their rep just said she is going to keep making changes over and over again. Watch out Hunt Valley, Daventry, Sangster, White Oaks, others??

The members always have the right to propose amendments, but if it’s folks like Sandy Anderson proposing amendments it’s going to be really ugly because she’s spent months pretentiously lecturing people on how they had to trust the process and how not everything can be at once.

Why does she seem to hold so much disdain for her own constituents? This feels less like leadership and more like contempt for the very people she represents.

I agree with you. We are in the Northern tip of West Springfield and feel as though she weirdly has personal vendetta again the community of West Springfield. She lives in the SoCo area, has a weird chip on her shoulder because she went to Lake Braddock, and has horrible communication with this community. My DD's elementary is not a split or attendance and was not moved in any of the scenarios, but after reading the comments this morning, I watched the recording and am now scared that Anderson will dig at WS over and over again. https://www.facebook.com/messenger_media?attachment_id=25814395584853159&message_id=mid.%24gAAWCuYc4EN2h0i5gTGboOh4oIUqW&thread_id=1551108232712413

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Franconia reps comments were a huge disappointment. Just a long winded thank you. Mentioning that Lewis is a problem, but not giving any solutions to fix the problem.

I agree. And repeating the "We don't want them" over and over didn't help. I understand what her constituents mean - but clinging to that instead of working towards a school that people are eager to attend is wild.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Franconia reps comments were a huge disappointment. Just a long winded thank you. Mentioning that Lewis is a problem, but not giving any solutions to fix the problem.

I agree. And repeating the "We don't want them" over and over didn't help. I understand what her constituents mean - but clinging to that instead of working towards a school that people are eager to attend is wild.

Those comments were almost as bad as when Lady said the solution to not providing transportation was to have the rich kids drive the poor kids to school. I can't tell if this board is dumb or negligent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Franconia reps comments were a huge disappointment. Just a long winded thank you. Mentioning that Lewis is a problem, but not giving any solutions to fix the problem.

I agree. And repeating the "We don't want them" over and over didn't help. I understand what her constituents mean - but clinging to that instead of working towards a school that people are eager to attend is wild.

Completely agree. Lewis parents have been vocal during the entire process and she has nothing to offer just “we don’t want them we don’t want them”. How about share your plans with your constituents on how you’re going to make the school desirable for more people instead of putting out a negative statement. The leadership program seems to be a massive failure already so what’s next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a new poster this morning and am so happy to see that others agree with my thoughts on Sandy at the meeting last night.

It has been so frustrating to reach out to her time and time again with no response. The entire Boundary review was her pet project - specifically getting a few specific neighborhoods into WSHS. Is this because that's where her biggest doners live? I don't know about that, but she has mentioned more than once that was her goal.

I am glad she hears that none of us want anyone moved out of WS, but then why is she moving people IN and demanding to move people out to make room for them.

I strongly disagree with the idea that these amendments aren't going to be made public until the vote. That feels especially sneaky, I am hopeful I misunderstood and we will see them sooner rather than later.

Sandy and her posse need to go -- that includes the new candidate Tom Dannen. They follow her blindly without asking the questions necessary to make decisions for the good of the community, not just Sandys pet project.

If anyone has any Sandy lore to help me understand her position, I would love to hear it. She attended LBSS and lives in South County zone - why is she so pressed to screw with WS?

I think she lives in Crosspointe in bounds for Silverbrook - which is extra crazy because she could do a lot to advocate for her neighborhood. Silverbrook is always bursting at the seams at 110% capacity. She could have communicated with Dunne and Moon, who wanted the Korean immersion program at Halley if/when the Hagel Circle area was moved out. Silverbrook and Halley are literally in the same neighborhood about a 1.5 mile walk from each other on neighborhood streets and paths. I hate to say it but with Hagel Circle out, Halley might just be the lowest FARMS school in FCPS or amongst the lowest. There would be room to shift a few streets of Silverbrook to Halley to decrease Silverbrook’s population a bit and give it some breathing room, and without the low income neighborhood there, there would be far fewer complaints (again just keeping it real …) and they could probably have a Korean program there as well if it didn’t get too large. Instead she’s meddling at another HS …

[Anonymous]

Did any board members inquire on the academic impact of proposed boundary changes at the high school level? For example, how would average GPA's, test scores, etc. look different based on students moving in or out? We are an impacted family and trying to understand the extent of the academic impact, if any.