FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having more compact school districts with less travel time so kids live in closer proximity to their peers throughout their education and ensuring all the kids in a feeder school within a district go to the same secondary and high schools. It may be an inconvenience for some kids now. But, that's very shortsighted. Overcrowding is not the sole issue that this boundary adjustment is addressing. Community cohesion and reduced travel times are also legitimate concerns.

Then, why is Thru breaking up my tight knit neighborhood and sending two streets 11 miles away through heavy traffic when they currently go to a school that is less than 3 miles away?
Our current school has a compact boundary.
All our schools are easily within a ten minute drive. Why does Thru want to change that?

This sounds like either Silverbrook, Sangster or Hunt Valley, where Thru is planning to take 3 neighborhoods from their closest neighborhood schools that they have always attended, and move them between 3 high schools without any difference in the enrollment, giving all 3 neighborhoods longer commutes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having more compact school districts with less travel time so kids live in closer proximity to their peers throughout their education and ensuring all the kids in a feeder school within a district go to the same secondary and high schools. It may be an inconvenience for some kids now. But, that's very shortsighted. Overcrowding is not the sole issue that this boundary adjustment is addressing. Community cohesion and reduced travel times are also legitimate concerns.

Then, why is Thru breaking up my tight knit neighborhood and sending two streets 11 miles away through heavy traffic when they currently go to a school that is less than 3 miles away?
Our current school has a compact boundary.
All our schools are easily within a ten minute drive. Why does Thru want to change that?

I can't speak specifically to your family's individual situation. But, I don't think it's in the county's interest to cater to people at the individual level and in the present They should focus on the aggregate and with a horizon that extends beyond kids just today. Making more compact communities which are connected, that makes sense.

The Silverbrook/South County, Hunt Valley/West Springfield and Sangster/Lake Braddock 3 way flip does the opposite. While overcrowding Newington Forest in the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s not have parents turn on parents - everyone just wants their kids to stay at their schools. That is true of all parents of all demographics.

Agreed, except for one frequent poster on this forum who would have you believe that kids being forced to switch schools would not impact their mental health. That’s seriously what the nuclear option proponents are left arguing since they’ve articulated zero reasons for most of these changes.

Imagine having to pretend, with a straight face, that having to change schools, leaving friends, teachers, sports, and activities, etc. would not have an impact on mental health.

Btw, this is the same school board that apparently goes to strip clubs while on official travel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s pretty funny that homes literally 10 feet from Woodson HS are zoned for Fairfax because they are in Fairfax City

Wondering if those families have ever complained about it

They have no choice. But, it is silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s pretty funny that homes literally 10 feet from Woodson HS are zoned for Fairfax because they are in Fairfax City

Wondering if those families have ever complained about it

Fairfax City is a separate City.

Are you new to the area?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone post the comments for that one?

They turned it off at 9pm and when i tried to refresh all data was gone. There were a lot about Coates (needs relief now). Quite a few about the McLean island going to falls church (people are against it). Lots for just stopping all together. Wanting residency checks, bringing pupil placements back before moving other kids

Well the interesting thing is the parents in the Falls Church island have a Facebook group that was instructing everyone to vote multiple times using an incognito browser. Their group started when the new boundary was announced and they questioned the “equity” of their children being moved to Falls Church High School. Their new angle is they are pointing out that it removes the one Title 1 school from McLean. Which would be a good point if their private group wasn’t originally focusing on property values and how their children are deserve to go to a school farther than two closer high schools. It seems like they are now trying to use the Title 1 families for their own gain. It should be the next episode of Nice White Parents.

Sounds like the Emerald Chase of Falls Church!

Yes, I am in the group because I am in the neighborhood (and do not want to change boundaries), but I am shocked at what my neighbors believe are valid reasons. This is literally one of the suggested talking points:
“· Moving our assigned HS from one of the top in US (McLean ranked 218, vs. FCHS at 5,630), does not provide equity for us or the children in our neighborhood (I think we need to be careful about how we communicate this point. Suggest we soften it or make it implied. I don’t think we’re going to garner a lot of goodwill being so direct)”

This is gross but not surprising. The title 1 kids at Timberlane never went to McLean. The rich kids did. The Title 1 kids were always at Luther Jackson and Falls Church. Not only is this argument completely disingenuous, it’s totally self-serving. These families are concerned about their property values and ESOL kids. Most of them send their precious children to local privates until 7th grade, just to avoid Timblerlane. They only believe in public schools when it’s the “best” publics their kids are attending. If anything, it’s more equitable to the Title 1 kids to in fact send these rich kids to a lower income schools like Luther Jackson and Falls Church.

That's incorrect. Timber Lane currently splits 60% to McLean and 40% to Falls Church, and the McLean part includes high-FARMS complexes that are just off Route 29 to the north just as the Falls Church parts includes high-FARMS complexes just off Route 29 to the south and off Annandale Road. Both the McLean and Falls Church parts also include a lot of single-family houses, and the ones zoned to McLean tend to be more expensive than the Falls Church houses and less expensive than any other SFHs zoned to McLean.

I don't doubt that it's higher-income families in the Poplar Heights single-family area behind this group, but don't misrepresent the school demographics feeding into both McLean and Falls Church.

You can also see how, when Thru proposed to move this area to Falls Church, they looked to offset it to some degree by moving other areas with apartments from Marshall to McLean, including some within walking distance of Marshall.

I don’t think they were looking for that. I think they saw they had two split feeders and moving Lemon Road balanced their McLean budget better than Westgate. If they were looking to balance apartments, they would have moved Westgate or a SPA from Shrevewood instead of Fall Hills. Majority of the moves that Thru has proposed has been moving SFH neighborhoods to Madison and McLean.

Maybe so, can't really say what's in the mind of these folks. But they propose to move the Spring Gate Apartments from Marshall to McLean when it's not part of any "fix" to an island or split feeder. Maybe it's just looking for various SPAs that they think make the numbers at the various schools (Kilmer, Marshall, Longfellow, and McLean) work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having more compact school districts with less travel time so kids live in closer proximity to their peers throughout their education and ensuring all the kids in a feeder school within a district go to the same secondary and high schools. It may be an inconvenience for some kids now. But, that's very shortsighted. Overcrowding is not the sole issue that this boundary adjustment is addressing. Community cohesion and reduced travel times are also legitimate concerns.

Then, why is Thru breaking up my tight knit neighborhood and sending two streets 11 miles away through heavy traffic when they currently go to a school that is less than 3 miles away?
Our current school has a compact boundary.
All our schools are easily within a ten minute drive. Why does Thru want to change that?

This sounds like either Silverbrook, Sangster or Hunt Valley, where Thru is planning to take 3 neighborhoods from their closest neighborhood schools that they have always attended, and move them between 3 high schools without any difference in the enrollment, giving all 3 neighborhoods longer commutes.

Well, it is a different neighborhood in a different area --so there certainly appear to be several situations like this. But, a PP thinks that we have to give up our neighborhoods so the "community" can have tighter neighborhoods. Does that make any sense at all? Another School Board member or fellow traveler, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone post the comments for that one?

They turned it off at 9pm and when i tried to refresh all data was gone. There were a lot about Coates (needs relief now). Quite a few about the McLean island going to falls church (people are against it). Lots for just stopping all together. Wanting residency checks, bringing pupil placements back before moving other kids

Well the interesting thing is the parents in the Falls Church island have a Facebook group that was instructing everyone to vote multiple times using an incognito browser. Their group started when the new boundary was announced and they questioned the “equity” of their children being moved to Falls Church High School. Their new angle is they are pointing out that it removes the one Title 1 school from McLean. Which would be a good point if their private group wasn’t originally focusing on property values and how their children are deserve to go to a school farther than two closer high schools. It seems like they are now trying to use the Title 1 families for their own gain. It should be the next episode of Nice White Parents.

Sounds like the Emerald Chase of Falls Church!

Yes, I am in the group because I am in the neighborhood (and do not want to change boundaries), but I am shocked at what my neighbors believe are valid reasons. This is literally one of the suggested talking points:
“· Moving our assigned HS from one of the top in US (McLean ranked 218, vs. FCHS at 5,630), does not provide equity for us or the children in our neighborhood (I think we need to be careful about how we communicate this point. Suggest we soften it or make it implied. I don’t think we’re going to garner a lot of goodwill being so direct)”

This is gross but not surprising. The title 1 kids at Timberlane never went to McLean. The rich kids did. The Title 1 kids were always at Luther Jackson and Falls Church. Not only is this argument completely disingenuous, it’s totally self-serving. These families are concerned about their property values and ESOL kids. Most of them send their precious children to local privates until 7th grade, just to avoid Timblerlane. They only believe in public schools when it’s the “best” publics their kids are attending. If anything, it’s more equitable to the Title 1 kids to in fact send these rich kids to a lower income schools like Luther Jackson and Falls Church.

That's incorrect. Timber Lane currently splits 60% to McLean and 40% to Falls Church, and the McLean part includes high-FARMS complexes that are just off Route 29 to the north just as the Falls Church parts includes high-FARMS complexes just off Route 29 to the south and off Annandale Road. Both the McLean and Falls Church parts also include a lot of single-family houses, and the ones zoned to McLean tend to be more expensive than the Falls Church houses and less expensive than any other SFHs zoned to McLean.

I don't doubt that it's higher-income families in the Poplar Heights single-family area behind this group, but don't misrepresent the school demographics feeding into both McLean and Falls Church.

You can also see how, when Thru proposed to move this area to Falls Church, they looked to offset it to some degree by moving other areas with apartments from Marshall to McLean, including some within walking distance of Marshall.

I don’t think they were looking for that. I think they saw they had two split feeders and moving Lemon Road balanced their McLean budget better than Westgate. If they were looking to balance apartments, they would have moved Westgate or a SPA from Shrevewood instead of Fall Hills. Majority of the moves that Thru has proposed has been moving SFH neighborhoods to Madison and McLean.

Maybe so, can't really say what's in the mind of these folks. But they propose to move the Spring Gate Apartments from Marshall to McLean when it's not part of any "fix" to an island or split feeder. Maybe it's just looking for various SPAs that they think make the numbers at the various schools (Kilmer, Marshall, Longfellow, and McLean) work.

Jesus, you’re right. They move those kids to McLean just because. It doesn’t solve for any of their three categories, and Marshall and Kilmer both have room to keep them at Marshall pyramid. Holy crap I’d be livid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would someone please explain how sending kids who live across the street from one another to two different high schools makes sense? And, I am talking about a street--not a major road. A neighborhood street.

That’s because they’re looking at this from a student planning area (SPA) level and not a neighborhood level. SPAs often cut between roads so you and the neighbor you share a backyard with may go to different schools. Sometimes it’ll cut through the road, so you go to a different school than the person across the street. Thru isn’t looking at this from the nuance of neighborhoods. It is taking SPAs like puzzle pieces. Chantilly Highlands is an example of their nonsensical moves. It borders Oakton, but that’s via the Fairfax County Parkway, but there’s no immediate outlet to 286 from that SPA.

It's negligence on the part of School Board members and FCPS staff to just deputize a consulting firm that isn't local to play with SPAs to achieve certain outcomes with marginal benefits and real costs. They compound this by refusing to share the SPA maps with BRAC members and others in the affected communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s pretty funny that homes literally 10 feet from Woodson HS are zoned for Fairfax because they are in Fairfax City

Wondering if those families have ever complained about it

Fairfax City is a separate City.

Are you new to the area?

It’s a separate city does not have its own school. It’s school are under Fairfax county public schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s pretty funny that homes literally 10 feet from Woodson HS are zoned for Fairfax because they are in Fairfax City

Wondering if those families have ever complained about it

Fairfax City is a separate City.

Are you new to the area?

It’s a separate city does not have its own school. It’s school are under Fairfax county public schools.

City code dictates that all city residents must attend the city’s schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone post the comments for that one?

They turned it off at 9pm and when i tried to refresh all data was gone. There were a lot about Coates (needs relief now). Quite a few about the McLean island going to falls church (people are against it). Lots for just stopping all together. Wanting residency checks, bringing pupil placements back before moving other kids

Well the interesting thing is the parents in the Falls Church island have a Facebook group that was instructing everyone to vote multiple times using an incognito browser. Their group started when the new boundary was announced and they questioned the “equity” of their children being moved to Falls Church High School. Their new angle is they are pointing out that it removes the one Title 1 school from McLean. Which would be a good point if their private group wasn’t originally focusing on property values and how their children are deserve to go to a school farther than two closer high schools. It seems like they are now trying to use the Title 1 families for their own gain. It should be the next episode of Nice White Parents.

Sounds like the Emerald Chase of Falls Church!

Yes, I am in the group because I am in the neighborhood (and do not want to change boundaries), but I am shocked at what my neighbors believe are valid reasons. This is literally one of the suggested talking points:
“· Moving our assigned HS from one of the top in US (McLean ranked 218, vs. FCHS at 5,630), does not provide equity for us or the children in our neighborhood (I think we need to be careful about how we communicate this point. Suggest we soften it or make it implied. I don’t think we’re going to garner a lot of goodwill being so direct)”

This is gross but not surprising. The title 1 kids at Timberlane never went to McLean. The rich kids did. The Title 1 kids were always at Luther Jackson and Falls Church. Not only is this argument completely disingenuous, it’s totally self-serving. These families are concerned about their property values and ESOL kids. Most of them send their precious children to local privates until 7th grade, just to avoid Timblerlane. They only believe in public schools when it’s the “best” publics their kids are attending. If anything, it’s more equitable to the Title 1 kids to in fact send these rich kids to a lower income schools like Luther Jackson and Falls Church.

That's incorrect. Timber Lane currently splits 60% to McLean and 40% to Falls Church, and the McLean part includes high-FARMS complexes that are just off Route 29 to the north just as the Falls Church parts includes high-FARMS complexes just off Route 29 to the south and off Annandale Road. Both the McLean and Falls Church parts also include a lot of single-family houses, and the ones zoned to McLean tend to be more expensive than the Falls Church houses and less expensive than any other SFHs zoned to McLean.

I don't doubt that it's higher-income families in the Poplar Heights single-family area behind this group, but don't misrepresent the school demographics feeding into both McLean and Falls Church.

You can also see how, when Thru proposed to move this area to Falls Church, they looked to offset it to some degree by moving other areas with apartments from Marshall to McLean, including some within walking distance of Marshall.

I don’t think they were looking for that. I think they saw they had two split feeders and moving Lemon Road balanced their McLean budget better than Westgate. If they were looking to balance apartments, they would have moved Westgate or a SPA from Shrevewood instead of Fall Hills. Majority of the moves that Thru has proposed has been moving SFH neighborhoods to Madison and McLean.

Maybe so, can't really say what's in the mind of these folks. But they propose to move the Spring Gate Apartments from Marshall to McLean when it's not part of any "fix" to an island or split feeder. Maybe it's just looking for various SPAs that they think make the numbers at the various schools (Kilmer, Marshall, Longfellow, and McLean) work.

Jesus, you’re right. They move those kids to McLean just because. It doesn’t solve for any of their three categories, and Marshall and Kilmer both have room to keep them at Marshall pyramid. Holy crap I’d be livid.

It’s just evidence of their sloppy work. They moved that SPA when they were exploring attendance islands. That SPA would bridge the Spring Hill attendance island to the rest of McLean. They never presented that scenario, as they set a criteria where a split feeder would favor the high school where their school physically resided.

At the same time they bridged Timber Lane to McLean via a reassigned Shrevewood SPA. At the eleventh hour they moved Timber Lane to Falls Church HS, but they kept that random Shrevewood SPA zoned to McLean/Longfellow even though it turns the school into a very disproportionate split feeder.

Their work is incredibly sloppy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s pretty funny that homes literally 10 feet from Woodson HS are zoned for Fairfax because they are in Fairfax City

Wondering if those families have ever complained about it

Fairfax City is a separate City.

Are you new to the area?

It’s a separate city does not have its own school. It’s school are under Fairfax county public schools.

City code dictates that all city residents must attend the city’s schools.

But it’s not the city’s school. It’s a Fairfax County public school. If they want it all to themselves then fully take it over and stop living off FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s pretty funny that homes literally 10 feet from Woodson HS are zoned for Fairfax because they are in Fairfax City

Wondering if those families have ever complained about it

Fairfax City is a separate City.

Are you new to the area?

It’s a separate city does not have its own school. It’s school are under Fairfax county public schools.

City code dictates that all city residents must attend the city’s schools.

But it’s not the city’s school. It’s a Fairfax County public school. If they want it all to themselves then fully take it over and stop living off FCPS.

The City of Fairfax paid for it with a city bond that passed. They have their own school board and facilities department. The city’s school buildings are on loan to FCPS to operate but the city could end that agreement any day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone post the comments for that one?

They turned it off at 9pm and when i tried to refresh all data was gone. There were a lot about Coates (needs relief now). Quite a few about the McLean island going to falls church (people are against it). Lots for just stopping all together. Wanting residency checks, bringing pupil placements back before moving other kids

Well the interesting thing is the parents in the Falls Church island have a Facebook group that was instructing everyone to vote multiple times using an incognito browser. Their group started when the new boundary was announced and they questioned the “equity” of their children being moved to Falls Church High School. Their new angle is they are pointing out that it removes the one Title 1 school from McLean. Which would be a good point if their private group wasn’t originally focusing on property values and how their children are deserve to go to a school farther than two closer high schools. It seems like they are now trying to use the Title 1 families for their own gain. It should be the next episode of Nice White Parents.

Sounds like the Emerald Chase of Falls Church!

Yes, I am in the group because I am in the neighborhood (and do not want to change boundaries), but I am shocked at what my neighbors believe are valid reasons. This is literally one of the suggested talking points:
“· Moving our assigned HS from one of the top in US (McLean ranked 218, vs. FCHS at 5,630), does not provide equity for us or the children in our neighborhood (I think we need to be careful about how we communicate this point. Suggest we soften it or make it implied. I don’t think we’re going to garner a lot of goodwill being so direct)”

This is gross but not surprising. The title 1 kids at Timberlane never went to McLean. The rich kids did. The Title 1 kids were always at Luther Jackson and Falls Church. Not only is this argument completely disingenuous, it’s totally self-serving. These families are concerned about their property values and ESOL kids. Most of them send their precious children to local privates until 7th grade, just to avoid Timblerlane. They only believe in public schools when it’s the “best” publics their kids are attending. If anything, it’s more equitable to the Title 1 kids to in fact send these rich kids to a lower income schools like Luther Jackson and Falls Church.

That's incorrect. Timber Lane currently splits 60% to McLean and 40% to Falls Church, and the McLean part includes high-FARMS complexes that are just off Route 29 to the north just as the Falls Church parts includes high-FARMS complexes just off Route 29 to the south and off Annandale Road. Both the McLean and Falls Church parts also include a lot of single-family houses, and the ones zoned to McLean tend to be more expensive than the Falls Church houses and less expensive than any other SFHs zoned to McLean.

I don't doubt that it's higher-income families in the Poplar Heights single-family area behind this group, but don't misrepresent the school demographics feeding into both McLean and Falls Church.

You can also see how, when Thru proposed to move this area to Falls Church, they looked to offset it to some degree by moving other areas with apartments from Marshall to McLean, including some within walking distance of Marshall.

I don’t think they were looking for that. I think they saw they had two split feeders and moving Lemon Road balanced their McLean budget better than Westgate. If they were looking to balance apartments, they would have moved Westgate or a SPA from Shrevewood instead of Fall Hills. Majority of the moves that Thru has proposed has been moving SFH neighborhoods to Madison and McLean.

Maybe so, can't really say what's in the mind of these folks. But they propose to move the Spring Gate Apartments from Marshall to McLean when it's not part of any "fix" to an island or split feeder. Maybe it's just looking for various SPAs that they think make the numbers at the various schools (Kilmer, Marshall, Longfellow, and McLean) work.

Jesus, you’re right. They move those kids to McLean just because. It doesn’t solve for any of their three categories, and Marshall and Kilmer both have room to keep them at Marshall pyramid. Holy crap I’d be livid.

It’s just evidence of their sloppy work. They moved that SPA when they were exploring attendance islands. That SPA would bridge the Spring Hill attendance island to the rest of McLean. They never presented that scenario, as they set a criteria where a split feeder would favor the high school where their school physically resided.

At the same time they bridged Timber Lane to McLean via a reassigned Shrevewood SPA. At the eleventh hour they moved Timber Lane to Falls Church HS, but they kept that random Shrevewood SPA zoned to McLean/Longfellow even though it turns the school into a very disproportionate split feeder.

Their work is incredibly sloppy.

Life-altering sloppiness for the kids in that area.