FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

After this fiasco, it wouldn't surprise me if they decided to follow the Falls Church City model.

[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.

I don't doubt their work was sloppy.

It's possible they flagged the move of this SPA with the Spring Gate apartments from Marshall to McLean as part of a potential "bridge" of the McLean attendance island that feeds to Spring Hill to the rest of the McLean boundaries, and then just left it there even after they decided to reassign that island in its entirety to Langley.

They wouldn't have necessarily addressed Spring Hill as a split feeder, because well over 25% of Spring Hill (closer to 40%) goes to McLean. They created a weird situation at Westgate where they purport to solve the split feeder by assigning the current area zoned to McLean to Franklin Sherman but ignore the area at Westgate they would reassign from Marshall to McLean.

They originally bridged the Timber Lane island to McLean by reassigning a Shrevewood SPA to McLean, and then kept it tagged as moving to McLean even after they decided to move the Timber Lane island in its entirety to Falls Church and Marshall.

It's possible they deliberately decided to retain the move of the two SPAs from Marshall to McLean even after deciding to eliminate both of the attendance islands because they wanted to reduce overcrowding at Kilmer and avoid pushing Longfellow too far below capacity (while making Kilmer feed 100% to Marshall and keeping 100% of Longfellow feeding into McLean). Especially without the SPA maps or data people are left looking in from the outside and trying to guess their intentions.

[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)”

Here is their longer lists of talking points: https://timberlanemcleanpyramid.com/?page_id=23

As I understand it, Emerald Chase wants to use the boundary study as an opportunity to move to a new HS (Chantilly). These folks, like many others who are the subject of Thru's latest proposals, want to stay at their current school (McLean).

A lot of people want to stay at their current school, which makes sense. Pretending it’s because of your concern for the education your Title 1 neighbors, which is what the group is saying will get the most attention, is ridiculous.

If Forestville was a Title I school, and Thru was proposing to move them to Herndon to fill up some of the vacant seats there, those parents would be making the same argument.

People will make every argument they think is at their disposal to stay put. It's not insane to think an all-Democratic school board will have second thoughts about moving the only Title I feeder to McLean out of the pyramid. And these folks only found out last week that Thru was proposing to redistrict them. None of the earlier BRAC slides had this area moving to Falls Church.

Using title 1 students to keep their non-title 1 kids at a high performing school is gross. I don’t care how they try to justify it. A lot of them don’t even send their kids to the title 1 elementary school (Timberlane). So to pretend to care about them is completely fake. They only send them to public once they are able to send them to a non-title 1 school (Longfellow).

But if they live in a very diverse community already, perhaps there’s some truth to their arguments, even if the ultimate motive is to stay at McLean for obvious reasons. So I’ll give them some benefit of the doubt.

Lol. No they don’t live in diverse communities These families live in nice white SFH neighborhoods. Have you been to poplars heights pool? They aren’t living in the apartment complexes with the kids who make their school title I. Heck even in the title I school kids self segregate and i guarantee the same happens in MS and HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

After this fiasco, it wouldn't surprise me if they decided to follow the Falls Church City model.

If they expand Centreville High to 3000, it might be the county that decides to stop sending county kids to the Fairfax City-owned schools. The city borders have complicated the FCPS boundaries for years.

[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)”

Here is their longer lists of talking points: https://timberlanemcleanpyramid.com/?page_id=23

As I understand it, Emerald Chase wants to use the boundary study as an opportunity to move to a new HS (Chantilly). These folks, like many others who are the subject of Thru's latest proposals, want to stay at their current school (McLean).

A lot of people want to stay at their current school, which makes sense. Pretending it’s because of your concern for the education your Title 1 neighbors, which is what the group is saying will get the most attention, is ridiculous.

If Forestville was a Title I school, and Thru was proposing to move them to Herndon to fill up some of the vacant seats there, those parents would be making the same argument.

People will make every argument they think is at their disposal to stay put. It's not insane to think an all-Democratic school board will have second thoughts about moving the only Title I feeder to McLean out of the pyramid. And these folks only found out last week that Thru was proposing to redistrict them. None of the earlier BRAC slides had this area moving to Falls Church.

Using title 1 students to keep their non-title 1 kids at a high performing school is gross. I don’t care how they try to justify it. A lot of them don’t even send their kids to the title 1 elementary school (Timberlane). So to pretend to care about them is completely fake. They only send them to public once they are able to send them to a non-title 1 school (Longfellow).

But if they live in a very diverse community already, perhaps there’s some truth to their arguments, even if the ultimate motive is to stay at McLean for obvious reasons. So I’ll give them some benefit of the doubt.

Lol. No they don’t live in diverse communities These families live in nice white SFH neighborhoods. Have you been to poplars heights pool? They aren’t living in the apartment complexes with the kids who make their school title I. Heck even in the title I school kids self segregate and i guarantee the same happens in MS and HS.

Yea, those families don’t mix with the poor kids.

[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.

No. You are wrong.

[Anonymous]

A bit of an aside but at today’s budget work session, one of the school board members said that community support for Dr. Reid is through the roof. They’re so out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A bit of an aside but at today’s budget work session, one of the school board members said that community support for Dr. Reid is through the roof. They’re so out of touch.

What the?!?

[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)”

Here is their longer lists of talking points: https://timberlanemcleanpyramid.com/?page_id=23

As I understand it, Emerald Chase wants to use the boundary study as an opportunity to move to a new HS (Chantilly). These folks, like many others who are the subject of Thru's latest proposals, want to stay at their current school (McLean).

A lot of people want to stay at their current school, which makes sense. Pretending it’s because of your concern for the education your Title 1 neighbors, which is what the group is saying will get the most attention, is ridiculous.

If Forestville was a Title I school, and Thru was proposing to move them to Herndon to fill up some of the vacant seats there, those parents would be making the same argument.

People will make every argument they think is at their disposal to stay put. It's not insane to think an all-Democratic school board will have second thoughts about moving the only Title I feeder to McLean out of the pyramid. And these folks only found out last week that Thru was proposing to redistrict them. None of the earlier BRAC slides had this area moving to Falls Church.

Using title 1 students to keep their non-title 1 kids at a high performing school is gross. I don’t care how they try to justify it. A lot of them don’t even send their kids to the title 1 elementary school (Timberlane). So to pretend to care about them is completely fake. They only send them to public once they are able to send them to a non-title 1 school (Longfellow).

But if they live in a very diverse community already, perhaps there’s some truth to their arguments, even if the ultimate motive is to stay at McLean for obvious reasons. So I’ll give them some benefit of the doubt.

Lol. No they don’t live in diverse communities These families live in nice white SFH neighborhoods. Have you been to poplars heights pool? They aren’t living in the apartment complexes with the kids who make their school title I. Heck even in the title I school kids self segregate and i guarantee the same happens in MS and HS.

You might be surprised how many of the kids who make Timber Lane Title 1 live north of 29, and how many nice white SFHs are south of it. Social self-segregation is a real thing on all sides and I'm not defending it, but that doesn't negate the potential impact on real, live Title I qualifying kids. Plus it honestly does seem gross to take a relatively poor and diverse SPA out of McLean so it can be one of the wealthiest, whitest SPAs in Falls Church - whether that's done intentionally or not.

[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.

Spring Gate remains at Westgate and new feed is Longfellow/Mclean. Split feeder. Westgate stretches to Route 7 near Marshall . Lemon Road is at Marshall. Dunn Loring is proposed to have 950 design capacity and FCPS wrote it could impact as many as 10 elementary schools. That could end up with middle and high school changes - Falls Church, Marshall, Mclean, Langley pyramids? Westgate holds 110 more program cap than Lemon Road [post Haycock AAP breakup gets Shrevewood and Westgate].

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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)”

Here is their longer lists of talking points: https://timberlanemcleanpyramid.com/?page_id=23

As I understand it, Emerald Chase wants to use the boundary study as an opportunity to move to a new HS (Chantilly). These folks, like many others who are the subject of Thru's latest proposals, want to stay at their current school (McLean).

A lot of people want to stay at their current school, which makes sense. Pretending it’s because of your concern for the education your Title 1 neighbors, which is what the group is saying will get the most attention, is ridiculous.

If Forestville was a Title I school, and Thru was proposing to move them to Herndon to fill up some of the vacant seats there, those parents would be making the same argument.

People will make every argument they think is at their disposal to stay put. It's not insane to think an all-Democratic school board will have second thoughts about moving the only Title I feeder to McLean out of the pyramid. And these folks only found out last week that Thru was proposing to redistrict them. None of the earlier BRAC slides had this area moving to Falls Church.

Using title 1 students to keep their non-title 1 kids at a high performing school is gross. I don’t care how they try to justify it. A lot of them don’t even send their kids to the title 1 elementary school (Timberlane). So to pretend to care about them is completely fake. They only send them to public once they are able to send them to a non-title 1 school (Longfellow).

But if they live in a very diverse community already, perhaps there’s some truth to their arguments, even if the ultimate motive is to stay at McLean for obvious reasons. So I’ll give them some benefit of the doubt.

Lol. No they don’t live in diverse communities These families live in nice white SFH neighborhoods. Have you been to poplars heights pool? They aren’t living in the apartment complexes with the kids who make their school title I. Heck even in the title I school kids self segregate and i guarantee the same happens in MS and HS.

You might be surprised how many of the kids who make Timber Lane Title 1 live north of 29, and how many nice white SFHs are south of it. Social self-segregation is a real thing on all sides and I'm not defending it, but that doesn't negate the potential impact on real, live Title I qualifying kids. Plus it honestly does seem gross to take a relatively poor and diverse SPA out of McLean so it can be one of the wealthiest, whitest SPAs in Falls Church - whether that's done intentionally or not.

I don't think they'd be taking this area out of McLean "so" it can be one of the "wealthiest, whitest SPAs in Falls Church." Timber Lane north of Route 29 currently consists of six SPAs, not one. Two of the six are fairly expensive single-family neighborhoods, not too different from some Falls Church areas that feed to Fairhill and Camelot ES. Three of the SPAs consist mostly of low-income garden apartments, and Thru proposes to move two of them to Marshall and one to Falls Church. The two that would move to Marshall have about the same number of kids as the one that would move to Falls Church. The sixth SPA is mostly the National Park Cemetery and has few students.

They've assigned a high priority to eliminating attendance islands, and this is an attendance island. If they move some kids to Falls Church, it also helps justify the current Falls Church expansion. There's nothing happening within the current FCHS boundaries that will increase the enrollment to 2500 kids.

Do they need to do this? No. The island doesn't hurt anyone, it's been at McLean for decades, it does add diversity to McLean, and it would be disruptive both for the Timber Lane families and the Marshall families that may get moved to McLean to offset, at least in part, the kids who would get moved out of McLean. But the proposal doesn't seem to be an exercise in overt social engineering, and the overall demographics of the island are similar to the current demographics at Falls Church.

[Anonymous]

The only reason the white families live in the area zoned to Timber Lane off of 29 (Greenway or something like that) is because it is currently zoned to McLean. We know a lot of them and it is a very tight knit community. I guarantee they are organizing and protesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only reason the white families live in the area zoned to Timber Lane off of 29 (Greenway or something like that) is because it is currently zoned to McLean. We know a lot of them and it is a very tight knit community. I guarantee they are organizing and protesting.

Greenway Downs is south of 29 and is NOT zone for McLean. It has always been zoned for FCHS.

It’s the neighborhood north of 29 (Poplar Heighs or whatever) that goes to Timber Lane fighting it. But yes they only go to TL because they know one day their kids can either AAP out to Haycock or go to Longfellow once they do their time.

[Anonymous]

If nobody in the community wants to be re-zoned then it makes no sense to do it. Shouldn't the decision be driven by the tax payers who this most impacts? Seems logical to me. In this situation the school board is going against the ENTIRE community. Thats literally dictatorship.

[Anonymous]

FCPS are hypocrites. Preaching DEI but making McLean an island of wealth. I wonder what rich parent at McLean paid them off to remove Timber Lane.

Speaking of islands, that so-called "attendance island" only looks like an island on a map because of a 2013 land exchange with Falls Church city. It's not, in reality, an island.