Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They either need to go with Map 4 moving Sangster and Shannon station to Lake Braddock, or leave WSHS alone for the next 5 years.

BRAC gave them a very good map. Map 4 was fair, reasonable, met all the mandates in the least disruptive way possible, and solved the WSHS overcrowding.

Reid rejected a perfectly good map that would have gixed WSHS.

The only change she should have made to Map 4 was keeping SPA 8922 at Lewis.

You keep mentioning BRAC. Region 4 BRAC recommended the changes to map 4 based on updates numbers and community feedback. Reid adopted their recommendations for region 4. Moving those Sangster kids moved like 16 kids per class (it did almost zero in lowering any numbers, and moving RV at Lewis negated any 'numbers' in savings. I also believe that neighborhood has been busting its butt to prevent any neighborhoods in WS to be moved out. The target has moved and Reid will need to focus on a larger area to get WSHS under 115%. Or, neighborhoods unite together and keep pressure on Sandy to keep it off the vague 'watchlist' and into boundary cycle outlined by their own policy.

Reid rejected Map 4 for WSHS.

In Reid's map:

* Sangster split feeder did not get moved to Lake Braddock. Sangster was left at WSHS, leaving over 60 students at WSHS that should have been moved to Lake Braddock.

* The most obvious move from Map 4, sending the Keene Mill island all the way on the other side of the boundary, Shannon Station, Blarney Stone, and a few other streets, to White Oaks and Lake Braddock was nixed by Reid. Instead, Reid moved all those Shannon Station townhouses to overcrowded Cardinal Forest, then moved Cardinal Forest homes that were walkable to CF to Keene Mill. This was around 18 students per grade, close to 120 elemementary students and around 70 high school students total.**

* Map 4 moved Rolling Valley SPA 8922 into WSHS from Lewis. Reid rejected this change temporarily, putting SPA 8922 on a mid cycle review to be looked at for rezoning to WSHS in January 2027.

Combined, the Sangster and Shannon Station recommendations from Map 4 removed around 130 students from WSHS, close to 5% of the students.

Combined with class of 2026 graduating, WSHS would be around the target of 105% capacity by adopting Map 4 rezoning Sangster and Shannon Station to Lake Braddock, and rejecting Map 4 moving SPA 8922 Rolling Valley Key Lewis into WSHS, leaving them at Lewis and Key.

Dr. Reid should have kept the majority of Map 4, rejecting only the Rolling Valley SPA 8922 move.

The school board should override Dr. Reid and adopt the Map 4 moved out of WSHS, and freezing any moves into WSHS.



** The Shannon Station townhouse community is slightly smaller than the townhouse community in SPA 8922. It sends between 15+ kids per grade to WSHS. Anderson wants to rezone SPA 8922 to WSHS claiming it will only be around 5 kids per grade because that is how many it sends to Lewis. In my opinion, SPA 8922 will reflect a similar high number of high school students very quickly if it is rezoned to WSHS from Lewis.

Map 4 was never 'BRAC's map'. They took the Thru map 4 and mage adjusting bases on the numbers and community feedback. Moving kids from Rolling Valley was never recommended by BRAC. I'm on the BRAC, but not for region 4. The whole process was a complete mess.

That explains a lot.

FCPS really treated the BRAC members terribly

Every single meeting I attended, they threw them under the bus repeatedly, any time anyone expressed displeasure with the school board, Dr. Reid, Thru. FCPS or the process.

Our reps honestly tried to do the best job they could, follow the guidance, and rezone as few people as possible. I spoke with several of the cpecial interest reps, and they tried to do a good job too. FCPS treated the volunteers so poorly

Not to mention the Brac members who were literally threatened with legal action personally from disgruntled neighborhoods to leave them alone. Which meant the loudest/most legally equipped neighborhoods went untouched even if was the most logical switch. And now they claim many of those BRAC members are interested in a full time position on the board going forward? The few I have spoken too could not be done fast enough. That was a lot of stress and additional work for being a volunteer. And on top of that having to be the scapegoat and take the blame on chin.

I’m sure they took a lot of undeserved grief. I think they asked for more information from FCPS and Thru Consulting and typically were blown off.

I’ll also say that when I wrote to BRAC members, the BRAC members from our pyramid never acknowledged I’d written them and the BRAC member from FairFACTS Matters consistently did. And we aren’t in the Langley pyramid, so that dispelled the notion that FairFACTS Matters was just a front for Great Falls.

Name your pyramid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They either need to go with Map 4 moving Sangster and Shannon station to Lake Braddock, or leave WSHS alone for the next 5 years.

BRAC gave them a very good map. Map 4 was fair, reasonable, met all the mandates in the least disruptive way possible, and solved the WSHS overcrowding.

Reid rejected a perfectly good map that would have gixed WSHS.

The only change she should have made to Map 4 was keeping SPA 8922 at Lewis.

You keep mentioning BRAC. Region 4 BRAC recommended the changes to map 4 based on updates numbers and community feedback. Reid adopted their recommendations for region 4. Moving those Sangster kids moved like 16 kids per class (it did almost zero in lowering any numbers, and moving RV at Lewis negated any 'numbers' in savings. I also believe that neighborhood has been busting its butt to prevent any neighborhoods in WS to be moved out. The target has moved and Reid will need to focus on a larger area to get WSHS under 115%. Or, neighborhoods unite together and keep pressure on Sandy to keep it off the vague 'watchlist' and into boundary cycle outlined by their own policy.

Reid rejected Map 4 for WSHS.

In Reid's map:

* Sangster split feeder did not get moved to Lake Braddock. Sangster was left at WSHS, leaving over 60 students at WSHS that should have been moved to Lake Braddock.

* The most obvious move from Map 4, sending the Keene Mill island all the way on the other side of the boundary, Shannon Station, Blarney Stone, and a few other streets, to White Oaks and Lake Braddock was nixed by Reid. Instead, Reid moved all those Shannon Station townhouses to overcrowded Cardinal Forest, then moved Cardinal Forest homes that were walkable to CF to Keene Mill. This was around 18 students per grade, close to 120 elemementary students and around 70 high school students total.**

* Map 4 moved Rolling Valley SPA 8922 into WSHS from Lewis. Reid rejected this change temporarily, putting SPA 8922 on a mid cycle review to be looked at for rezoning to WSHS in January 2027.

Combined, the Sangster and Shannon Station recommendations from Map 4 removed around 130 students from WSHS, close to 5% of the students.

Combined with class of 2026 graduating, WSHS would be around the target of 105% capacity by adopting Map 4 rezoning Sangster and Shannon Station to Lake Braddock, and rejecting Map 4 moving SPA 8922 Rolling Valley Key Lewis into WSHS, leaving them at Lewis and Key.

Dr. Reid should have kept the majority of Map 4, rejecting only the Rolling Valley SPA 8922 move.

The school board should override Dr. Reid and adopt the Map 4 moved out of WSHS, and freezing any moves into WSHS.



** The Shannon Station townhouse community is slightly smaller than the townhouse community in SPA 8922. It sends between 15+ kids per grade to WSHS. Anderson wants to rezone SPA 8922 to WSHS claiming it will only be around 5 kids per grade because that is how many it sends to Lewis. In my opinion, SPA 8922 will reflect a similar high number of high school students very quickly if it is rezoned to WSHS from Lewis.

Map 4 was never 'BRAC's map'. They took the Thru map 4 and mage adjusting bases on the numbers and community feedback. Moving kids from Rolling Valley was never recommended by BRAC. I'm on the BRAC, but not for region 4. The whole process was a complete mess.

That explains a lot.

FCPS really treated the BRAC members terribly

Every single meeting I attended, they threw them under the bus repeatedly, any time anyone expressed displeasure with the school board, Dr. Reid, Thru. FCPS or the process.

Our reps honestly tried to do the best job they could, follow the guidance, and rezone as few people as possible. I spoke with several of the cpecial interest reps, and they tried to do a good job too. FCPS treated the volunteers so poorly

Not to mention the Brac members who were literally threatened with legal action personally from disgruntled neighborhoods to leave them alone. Which meant the loudest/most legally equipped neighborhoods went untouched even if was the most logical switch. And now they claim many of those BRAC members are interested in a full time position on the board going forward? The few I have spoken too could not be done fast enough. That was a lot of stress and additional work for being a volunteer. And on top of that having to be the scapegoat and take the blame on chin.

I’m sure they took a lot of undeserved grief. I think they asked for more information from FCPS and Thru Consulting and typically were blown off.

I’ll also say that when I wrote to BRAC members, the BRAC members from our pyramid never acknowledged I’d written them and the BRAC member from FairFACTS Matters consistently did. And we aren’t in the Langley pyramid, so that dispelled the notion that FairFACTS Matters was just a front for Great Falls.

Name your pyramid.

I am a different poster.

We are on the other side of the county.

Our BRAC reps were helpful, but the FairFacts people were exceptionally helpful.

At the beginning of the process, they even offered to drive out to our area and hold a community meeting to get everyone up to speed on the background of rezoning polices, 8130 and the upcoming brac process.

We are far away from them, and our schools do not overlap in any way.

They continued to keep us informed throughout the process.

FairFacts was very helpful to many areas not part of Great Falls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They either need to go with Map 4 moving Sangster and Shannon station to Lake Braddock, or leave WSHS alone for the next 5 years.

BRAC gave them a very good map. Map 4 was fair, reasonable, met all the mandates in the least disruptive way possible, and solved the WSHS overcrowding.

Reid rejected a perfectly good map that would have gixed WSHS.

The only change she should have made to Map 4 was keeping SPA 8922 at Lewis.

You keep mentioning BRAC. Region 4 BRAC recommended the changes to map 4 based on updates numbers and community feedback. Reid adopted their recommendations for region 4. Moving those Sangster kids moved like 16 kids per class (it did almost zero in lowering any numbers, and moving RV at Lewis negated any 'numbers' in savings. I also believe that neighborhood has been busting its butt to prevent any neighborhoods in WS to be moved out. The target has moved and Reid will need to focus on a larger area to get WSHS under 115%. Or, neighborhoods unite together and keep pressure on Sandy to keep it off the vague 'watchlist' and into boundary cycle outlined by their own policy.

Reid rejected Map 4 for WSHS.

In Reid's map:

* Sangster split feeder did not get moved to Lake Braddock. Sangster was left at WSHS, leaving over 60 students at WSHS that should have been moved to Lake Braddock.

* The most obvious move from Map 4, sending the Keene Mill island all the way on the other side of the boundary, Shannon Station, Blarney Stone, and a few other streets, to White Oaks and Lake Braddock was nixed by Reid. Instead, Reid moved all those Shannon Station townhouses to overcrowded Cardinal Forest, then moved Cardinal Forest homes that were walkable to CF to Keene Mill. This was around 18 students per grade, close to 120 elemementary students and around 70 high school students total.**

* Map 4 moved Rolling Valley SPA 8922 into WSHS from Lewis. Reid rejected this change temporarily, putting SPA 8922 on a mid cycle review to be looked at for rezoning to WSHS in January 2027.

Combined, the Sangster and Shannon Station recommendations from Map 4 removed around 130 students from WSHS, close to 5% of the students.

Combined with class of 2026 graduating, WSHS would be around the target of 105% capacity by adopting Map 4 rezoning Sangster and Shannon Station to Lake Braddock, and rejecting Map 4 moving SPA 8922 Rolling Valley Key Lewis into WSHS, leaving them at Lewis and Key.

Dr. Reid should have kept the majority of Map 4, rejecting only the Rolling Valley SPA 8922 move.

The school board should override Dr. Reid and adopt the Map 4 moved out of WSHS, and freezing any moves into WSHS.



** The Shannon Station townhouse community is slightly smaller than the townhouse community in SPA 8922. It sends between 15+ kids per grade to WSHS. Anderson wants to rezone SPA 8922 to WSHS claiming it will only be around 5 kids per grade because that is how many it sends to Lewis. In my opinion, SPA 8922 will reflect a similar high number of high school students very quickly if it is rezoned to WSHS from Lewis.

Map 4 was never 'BRAC's map'. They took the Thru map 4 and mage adjusting bases on the numbers and community feedback. Moving kids from Rolling Valley was never recommended by BRAC. I'm on the BRAC, but not for region 4. The whole process was a complete mess.

That explains a lot.

FCPS really treated the BRAC members terribly

Every single meeting I attended, they threw them under the bus repeatedly, any time anyone expressed displeasure with the school board, Dr. Reid, Thru. FCPS or the process.

Our reps honestly tried to do the best job they could, follow the guidance, and rezone as few people as possible. I spoke with several of the cpecial interest reps, and they tried to do a good job too. FCPS treated the volunteers so poorly

Not to mention the Brac members who were literally threatened with legal action personally from disgruntled neighborhoods to leave them alone. Which meant the loudest/most legally equipped neighborhoods went untouched even if was the most logical switch. And now they claim many of those BRAC members are interested in a full time position on the board going forward? The few I have spoken too could not be done fast enough. That was a lot of stress and additional work for being a volunteer. And on top of that having to be the scapegoat and take the blame on chin.

I’m sure they took a lot of undeserved grief. I think they asked for more information from FCPS and Thru Consulting and typically were blown off.

I’ll also say that when I wrote to BRAC members, the BRAC members from our pyramid never acknowledged I’d written them and the BRAC member from FairFACTS Matters consistently did. And we aren’t in the Langley pyramid, so that dispelled the notion that FairFACTS Matters was just a front for Great Falls.

Name your pyramid.

I don't respond well to commands on an anonymous forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They either need to go with Map 4 moving Sangster and Shannon station to Lake Braddock, or leave WSHS alone for the next 5 years.

BRAC gave them a very good map. Map 4 was fair, reasonable, met all the mandates in the least disruptive way possible, and solved the WSHS overcrowding.

Reid rejected a perfectly good map that would have gixed WSHS.

The only change she should have made to Map 4 was keeping SPA 8922 at Lewis.

You keep mentioning BRAC. Region 4 BRAC recommended the changes to map 4 based on updates numbers and community feedback. Reid adopted their recommendations for region 4. Moving those Sangster kids moved like 16 kids per class (it did almost zero in lowering any numbers, and moving RV at Lewis negated any 'numbers' in savings. I also believe that neighborhood has been busting its butt to prevent any neighborhoods in WS to be moved out. The target has moved and Reid will need to focus on a larger area to get WSHS under 115%. Or, neighborhoods unite together and keep pressure on Sandy to keep it off the vague 'watchlist' and into boundary cycle outlined by their own policy.

Reid rejected Map 4 for WSHS.

In Reid's map:

* Sangster split feeder did not get moved to Lake Braddock. Sangster was left at WSHS, leaving over 60 students at WSHS that should have been moved to Lake Braddock.

* The most obvious move from Map 4, sending the Keene Mill island all the way on the other side of the boundary, Shannon Station, Blarney Stone, and a few other streets, to White Oaks and Lake Braddock was nixed by Reid. Instead, Reid moved all those Shannon Station townhouses to overcrowded Cardinal Forest, then moved Cardinal Forest homes that were walkable to CF to Keene Mill. This was around 18 students per grade, close to 120 elemementary students and around 70 high school students total.**

* Map 4 moved Rolling Valley SPA 8922 into WSHS from Lewis. Reid rejected this change temporarily, putting SPA 8922 on a mid cycle review to be looked at for rezoning to WSHS in January 2027.

Combined, the Sangster and Shannon Station recommendations from Map 4 removed around 130 students from WSHS, close to 5% of the students.

Combined with class of 2026 graduating, WSHS would be around the target of 105% capacity by adopting Map 4 rezoning Sangster and Shannon Station to Lake Braddock, and rejecting Map 4 moving SPA 8922 Rolling Valley Key Lewis into WSHS, leaving them at Lewis and Key.

Dr. Reid should have kept the majority of Map 4, rejecting only the Rolling Valley SPA 8922 move.

The school board should override Dr. Reid and adopt the Map 4 moved out of WSHS, and freezing any moves into WSHS.



** The Shannon Station townhouse community is slightly smaller than the townhouse community in SPA 8922. It sends between 15+ kids per grade to WSHS. Anderson wants to rezone SPA 8922 to WSHS claiming it will only be around 5 kids per grade because that is how many it sends to Lewis. In my opinion, SPA 8922 will reflect a similar high number of high school students very quickly if it is rezoned to WSHS from Lewis.

Map 4 was never 'BRAC's map'. They took the Thru map 4 and mage adjusting bases on the numbers and community feedback. Moving kids from Rolling Valley was never recommended by BRAC. I'm on the BRAC, but not for region 4. The whole process was a complete mess.

That explains a lot.

FCPS really treated the BRAC members terribly

Every single meeting I attended, they threw them under the bus repeatedly, any time anyone expressed displeasure with the school board, Dr. Reid, Thru. FCPS or the process.

Our reps honestly tried to do the best job they could, follow the guidance, and rezone as few people as possible. I spoke with several of the cpecial interest reps, and they tried to do a good job too. FCPS treated the volunteers so poorly

Not to mention the Brac members who were literally threatened with legal action personally from disgruntled neighborhoods to leave them alone. Which meant the loudest/most legally equipped neighborhoods went untouched even if was the most logical switch. And now they claim many of those BRAC members are interested in a full time position on the board going forward? The few I have spoken too could not be done fast enough. That was a lot of stress and additional work for being a volunteer. And on top of that having to be the scapegoat and take the blame on chin.

I’m sure they took a lot of undeserved grief. I think they asked for more information from FCPS and Thru Consulting and typically were blown off.

I’ll also say that when I wrote to BRAC members, the BRAC members from our pyramid never acknowledged I’d written them and the BRAC member from FairFACTS Matters consistently did. And we aren’t in the Langley pyramid, so that dispelled the notion that FairFACTS Matters was just a front for Great Falls.

Name your pyramid.

I don't respond well to commands on an anonymous forum.

How about I throw in a please to that command.

Just curious as to what your pyramid is and how FairFACTS got involved into BRAC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about Western HS. It's about a Herndon parent who claimed to represent all of the Herndon pyramid PTAs and complained that FCPS isn't moving Langley kids to Herndon, and then triggering a reaction from someone else who also claims to be a Herndon parent that PTA lady doesn't represent them (presumably because they are happy with Herndon and don't want anyone reassigned there who doesn't want to be there).

I get the irritation with someone who claims to have a platform they don't have, but realistically nothing is going to change the Langley/Herndon boundary right now. The case for doing so hasn't been made. Things may be different in five years if the Tysons area being moved to Langley eventually overcrowds Cooper or Langley, but that will play out over time, and not before they vote on boundaries on January 22nd.

Listening to some posters here and other places who were against the new high school, they like to claim Herndon HS has hundreds and hundreds of empty seats. Isn't under-enrollment listed as one reason for possible boundary adjustments? Seems like there is a case to be made to me. I'm betting you won't hear about those empty seats nearly as much as we come up on the next boundary review cycle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about Western HS. It's about a Herndon parent who claimed to represent all of the Herndon pyramid PTAs and complained that FCPS isn't moving Langley kids to Herndon, and then triggering a reaction from someone else who also claims to be a Herndon parent that PTA lady doesn't represent them (presumably because they are happy with Herndon and don't want anyone reassigned there who doesn't want to be there).

I get the irritation with someone who claims to have a platform they don't have, but realistically nothing is going to change the Langley/Herndon boundary right now. The case for doing so hasn't been made. Things may be different in five years if the Tysons area being moved to Langley eventually overcrowds Cooper or Langley, but that will play out over time, and not before they vote on boundaries on January 22nd.

Listening to some posters here and other places who were against the new high school, they like to claim Herndon HS has hundreds and hundreds of empty seats. Isn't under-enrollment listed as one reason for possible boundary adjustments? Seems like there is a case to be made to me. I'm betting you won't hear about those empty seats nearly as much as we come up on the next boundary review cycle.

It’s not a “claim.” It’s a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about Western HS. It's about a Herndon parent who claimed to represent all of the Herndon pyramid PTAs and complained that FCPS isn't moving Langley kids to Herndon, and then triggering a reaction from someone else who also claims to be a Herndon parent that PTA lady doesn't represent them (presumably because they are happy with Herndon and don't want anyone reassigned there who doesn't want to be there).

I get the irritation with someone who claims to have a platform they don't have, but realistically nothing is going to change the Langley/Herndon boundary right now. The case for doing so hasn't been made. Things may be different in five years if the Tysons area being moved to Langley eventually overcrowds Cooper or Langley, but that will play out over time, and not before they vote on boundaries on January 22nd.

Listening to some posters here and other places who were against the new high school, they like to claim Herndon HS has hundreds and hundreds of empty seats. Isn't under-enrollment listed as one reason for possible boundary adjustments? Seems like there is a case to be made to me. I'm betting you won't hear about those empty seats nearly as much as we come up on the next boundary review cycle.

It’s not a “claim.” It’s a fact.

Then, get rid of IB at South Lakes and get those PP back.
Next, take those people who live two miles from Langley back to Herndon.

Done.

[Anonymous]

Over here getting my popcorn buttered and salted for the Herndon vs. Western Great Falls /North Herndon smackdown! Let’s get ready to rummmble!!!

[Anonymous]

You're 5 years early for that one. Right now those groups are just fighting a proxy war over the Western High School existence / boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about Western HS. It's about a Herndon parent who claimed to represent all of the Herndon pyramid PTAs and complained that FCPS isn't moving Langley kids to Herndon, and then triggering a reaction from someone else who also claims to be a Herndon parent that PTA lady doesn't represent them (presumably because they are happy with Herndon and don't want anyone reassigned there who doesn't want to be there).

I get the irritation with someone who claims to have a platform they don't have, but realistically nothing is going to change the Langley/Herndon boundary right now. The case for doing so hasn't been made. Things may be different in five years if the Tysons area being moved to Langley eventually overcrowds Cooper or Langley, but that will play out over time, and not before they vote on boundaries on January 22nd.

Listening to some posters here and other places who were against the new high school, they like to claim Herndon HS has hundreds and hundreds of empty seats. Isn't under-enrollment listed as one reason for possible boundary adjustments? Seems like there is a case to be made to me. I'm betting you won't hear about those empty seats nearly as much as we come up on the next boundary review cycle.

It’s not a “claim.” It’s a fact.

Then, get rid of IB at South Lakes and get those PP back.
Next, take those people who live two miles from Langley back to Herndon.

Done.

Langley isn’t over 105% now. Sorry.

If all the pupil placements from Herndon return to South Lakes, you still have hundreds of empty seats. They are just divided between the two schools rather than concentrated at Herndon. Move Fox Mill to Western and the number of vacancies between HHS and SLHS only increases.

In any event the focus of the discussion was on speakers at public hearings claiming to speak on behalf of others they had no authority to speak for. The fact that she made a pitch for redistricting Langley was incidental.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about Western HS. It's about a Herndon parent who claimed to represent all of the Herndon pyramid PTAs and complained that FCPS isn't moving Langley kids to Herndon, and then triggering a reaction from someone else who also claims to be a Herndon parent that PTA lady doesn't represent them (presumably because they are happy with Herndon and don't want anyone reassigned there who doesn't want to be there).

I get the irritation with someone who claims to have a platform they don't have, but realistically nothing is going to change the Langley/Herndon boundary right now. The case for doing so hasn't been made. Things may be different in five years if the Tysons area being moved to Langley eventually overcrowds Cooper or Langley, but that will play out over time, and not before they vote on boundaries on January 22nd.

Listening to some posters here and other places who were against the new high school, they like to claim Herndon HS has hundreds and hundreds of empty seats. Isn't under-enrollment listed as one reason for possible boundary adjustments? Seems like there is a case to be made to me. I'm betting you won't hear about those empty seats nearly as much as we come up on the next boundary review cycle.

It’s not a “claim.” It’s a fact.

Then, get rid of IB at South Lakes and get those PP back.
Next, take those people who live two miles from Langley back to Herndon.

Done.

Typically PP refers to Previous Poster.

What does it mean in this context?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This isn't about Western HS. It's about a Herndon parent who claimed to represent all of the Herndon pyramid PTAs and complained that FCPS isn't moving Langley kids to Herndon, and then triggering a reaction from someone else who also claims to be a Herndon parent that PTA lady doesn't represent them (presumably because they are happy with Herndon and don't want anyone reassigned there who doesn't want to be there).

I get the irritation with someone who claims to have a platform they don't have, but realistically nothing is going to change the Langley/Herndon boundary right now. The case for doing so hasn't been made. Things may be different in five years if the Tysons area being moved to Langley eventually overcrowds Cooper or Langley, but that will play out over time, and not before they vote on boundaries on January 22nd.

Listening to some posters here and other places who were against the new high school, they like to claim Herndon HS has hundreds and hundreds of empty seats. Isn't under-enrollment listed as one reason for possible boundary adjustments? Seems like there is a case to be made to me. I'm betting you won't hear about those empty seats nearly as much as we come up on the next boundary review cycle.

It’s not a “claim.” It’s a fact.

Then, get rid of IB at South Lakes and get those PP back.
Next, take those people who live two miles from Langley back to Herndon.

Done.

Typically PP refers to Previous Poster.

What does it mean in this context?

Pupil Placements

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Langley isn’t over 105% now. Sorry.

If all the pupil placements from Herndon return to South Lakes, you still have hundreds of empty seats. They are just divided between the two schools rather than concentrated at Herndon. Move Fox Mill to Western and the number of vacancies between HHS and SLHS only increases.

In any event the focus of the discussion was on speakers at public hearings claiming to speak on behalf of others they had no authority to speak for. The fact that she made a pitch for redistricting Langley was incidental.

The trigger wouldn't be Langley being over 105%, the trigger would be Herndon being under-enrolled. In the future Langley and Cooper may also cross that 105% trigger too - especially now that they are creating an island of Westbriar kids north of Wolftrap that are going to likely end up at Colvin Run and the Langley pyramid sometime in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley isn’t over 105% now. Sorry.

If all the pupil placements from Herndon return to South Lakes, you still have hundreds of empty seats. They are just divided between the two schools rather than concentrated at Herndon. Move Fox Mill to Western and the number of vacancies between HHS and SLHS only increases.

In any event the focus of the discussion was on speakers at public hearings claiming to speak on behalf of others they had no authority to speak for. The fact that she made a pitch for redistricting Langley was incidental.

The trigger wouldn't be Langley being over 105%, the trigger would be Herndon being under-enrolled. In the future Langley and Cooper may also cross that 105% trigger too - especially now that they are creating an island of Westbriar kids north of Wolftrap that are going to likely end up at Colvin Run and the Langley pyramid sometime in the future.

Well, maybe, maybe not.

If you look at the almost-completed boundary study, they treated overcrowding over 105% as something warranting a potential boundary change and under-enrollment as something that might require further consideration as to the root causes. That was evidenced by their not addressing Lewis in Scenarios 1-4, only tentatively proposing something (Bren Mar Park getting moved from Edison to Lewis) after Scenario 4 had come out, and then dropping it, saying that, among other things, they wanted to look at program enhancements at Lewis.

No one knows what will happen with the Westbriar island. For now, it's still assigned to Kilmer and Marshall and, given the changes to the Kilmer/Marshall boundaries moving kids to Thoreau/Madison, it would push Marshall yet further below capacity if kids moved from that island to the Langley pyramid. Maybe at some point growth in Tysons pushes Marshall back up over 105%, just like Tysons growth could push Langley over 105%. But for now you seem to hoping for things that more likely are off the table for years.

[Anonymous]

The boundary changes didn’t do anything about the under enrolled schools because the School Board is petrified of the angry parents who would be moved to those schools. The school board will probably make those moves one at a time to decrease the likihood of them being voted out. Think of the redistricting to SLHS 20 years ago. It was a small area that was impacted, no one else.

Their mistake this time is that announced that they wanted to move kids to balance out schools and every parent group in the County was on guard. When plans were laid out, there were already organized protests and a lot of them. The loud complaining across the area scared the crap out of them.

To top it off, the Crossfield families who don’t want to move to Western are loudly complaiing and, according to one poster, meeting with Reid to explain why they should not be moved from Oakton. I would bet that Crossfield is not moved to Western, or at least not all of Crossfield.

The school board could make some smart changes, like place academies at Herndon and Lewis that people want to attend and require people pupil place into the programs. Or create Votech schools at those schools so that there is a reason for people to want to move to those schools and offering programs that might be a better fit for the population that is already there. And add full AP to all schools to stop the pupil placement. Keep IB at schools that have kids completing the IB diploma, so not Lewis and Mt. Vernon and Annandale.