FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

And most McLean families accept that they have a modular while other schools got expensive additions they may not have needed, at least not yet. That doesn't mean they want their kids used as a demonstration project so that some random taxpayer feels better about how their tax dollars were spent.

Thru consistently treats modular seats as the equivalent of permanent seats when assessing school capacity. Ignore those seats at McLean and you have to ignore them everywhere else in the county, and that means a whole slew of additional boundary adjustments. And with those additional boundary adjustment you can further throw out the window the possibility they are going to be able to grandfather many kids. They won't have the bus fleet to do it, and even if they did grandfather rising seniors they won't be able to provide transportation.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

Facts make me right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh look, if it isn’t the PC police bringing up race again pretending like others did. Face it, boundary change proponents, you’re the ones obsessed with the race of students. It’s gross.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

You pretty much called everyone who doesn't want their kids rezoned racists.

Telling them they are a modern version of jim crow is an ugly slur, and trope for aligning them to klansmen, the architects of jim crow.

All they want is for their kids to be left alone. There is nothing jim crow anout that.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

Facts make me right

Wow. Apologies. These elusive unstated facts that you have not provided clearly demonstrate your position that boundary adjustment is completely wrong and that status quo must be maintained. Thank you for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think THRU is doing a good job with the boundaries (they do not seem to know the area at all and communication is poor) and there should be rules about grandfathering seniors etc. But, what I do not understand how so many people are absolutely shocked their school might be in a boundary change. Especially schools that have closer options. Our kids go to public schools, every county around us has had relatively recent boundary changes, it is not a surprise that things need to change. I am not saying do not advocate for the changes that do not make sense, but some of the outrage is not justified.

Hi, I think your kids should be moved. Yours specifically must move. You’ll volunteer to move them, right?

Outraged at the suggestion? So sorry, your outrage isn’t justified. 🤡

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

You pretty much called everyone who doesn't want their kids rezoned racists.

Telling them they are a modern version of jim crow is an ugly slur, and trope for aligning them to klansmen, the architects of jim crow.

All they want is for their kids to be left alone. There is nothing jim crow anout that.

+1. These lwnjs are so clueless.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

You pretty much called everyone who doesn't want their kids rezoned racists.

Telling them they are a modern version of jim crow is an ugly slur, and trope for aligning them to klansmen, the architects of jim crow.

All they want is for their kids to be left alone. There is nothing jim crow anout that.

I didnt call anyone racist. I said that people are using the same transparently self serving arguments that were used during Jim Crow to avoid integration. And the arguments are the same. Everyone wants their kids to be left alone in the situation that they are currently in. The status quo should be maintained. The District has a reasonable interest in addressing issues surrounding attendance islands and split feeders. Sorry it may not vibe with you wanting your kids to be left alone.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

You pretty much called everyone who doesn't want their kids rezoned racists.

Telling them they are a modern version of jim crow is an ugly slur, and trope for aligning them to klansmen, the architects of jim crow.

All they want is for their kids to be left alone. There is nothing jim crow anout that.

I didnt call anyone racist. I said that people are using the same transparently self serving arguments that were used during Jim Crow to avoid integration. And the arguments are the same. Everyone wants their kids to be left alone in the situation that they are currently in. The status quo should be maintained. The District has a reasonable interest in addressing issues surrounding attendance islands and split feeders. Sorry it may not vibe with you wanting your kids to be left alone.

The underlined is calling people racist, clear as day.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

You pretty much called everyone who doesn't want their kids rezoned racists.

Telling them they are a modern version of jim crow is an ugly slur, and trope for aligning them to klansmen, the architects of jim crow.

All they want is for their kids to be left alone. There is nothing jim crow anout that.

I didnt call anyone racist. I said that people are using the same transparently self serving arguments that were used during Jim Crow to avoid integration. And the arguments are the same. Everyone wants their kids to be left alone in the situation that they are currently in. The status quo should be maintained. The District has a reasonable interest in addressing issues surrounding attendance islands and split feeders. Sorry it may not vibe with you wanting your kids to be left alone.

The underlined is calling people racist, clear as day.

I disagree. Please explain how saying the arguments used here by the anti-boundary adjustment crowd are the same used by those opposing integration in the civil rights era is equivalent to me calling someone racist. Apparently, my Fairfax County education is failing me.

It seems like you are just trying to dismiss my argument by accusing me of saying something which was not said because you lack an actual argument. I am willing to entertain this position though, if you can properly explain.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

You pretty much called everyone who doesn't want their kids rezoned racists.

Telling them they are a modern version of jim crow is an ugly slur, and trope for aligning them to klansmen, the architects of jim crow.

All they want is for their kids to be left alone. There is nothing jim crow anout that.

I didnt call anyone racist. I said that people are using the same transparently self serving arguments that were used during Jim Crow to avoid integration. And the arguments are the same. Everyone wants their kids to be left alone in the situation that they are currently in. The status quo should be maintained. The District has a reasonable interest in addressing issues surrounding attendance islands and split feeders. Sorry it may not vibe with you wanting your kids to be left alone.

The underlined is calling people racist, clear as day.

I disagree. Please explain how saying the arguments used here by the anti-boundary adjustment crowd are the same used by those opposing integration in the civil rights era is equivalent to me calling someone racist. Apparently, my Fairfax County education is failing me.

It seems like you are just trying to dismiss my argument by accusing me of saying something which was not said because you lack an actual argument. I am willing to entertain this position though, if you can properly explain.

DP. What? You call people racist and then have the gall to say that they are trying to dismiss your argument. What a wackadoodle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

I am not from the Timber Lane area but I took a fresh look at that community's talking points, which you claim are "absolutely weak and ridiculous." Here is my assessment:

#1: It's inconsistent with equity goals to move the only Title I feeder out of McLean: I don't think this is a ridiculous argument. I ran some numbers and my estimate is that moving Timber Lane out of McLean reduces the FARMS rate at McLean from about 12% to 8%. It's a low percentage in either case, but if it's not absolutely necessary (and it isn't here) then why not preserve more economic diversity at one of the county's wealthier high schools?

#2: McLean has better programs and more opportunities than Falls Church (clubs, sports, AP): It's an accurate statement of fact, but a weak argument since Falls Church has plenty to offer.

#3: The Timber Lane attendance island is barely an attendance island: This is a fair argument. Not all attendance islands are alike. The Timber Lane island is an island primarily because of the boundary between the county and Falls Church City, and exacerbated by a land deal in the early 2010s in which the county and FCC swapped a parcel of land for a water utility. But it's not far removed from the main McLean attendance island and hardly as removed from McLean as, say, the western Fairfax HS attendance island is from Fairfax HS.

#4: The proposed boundary changes just shift overcrowding from McLean HS to Jackson HS: This is a weak argument because McLean would be at 100% capacity and Jackson under 105% capacity under Thru's proposals.

#5: The change would have negative safety impacts given that kids would now have to cross Routes 29 and 50: This is a reasonable argument given that traffic on Route 7, which those kids currenty cross, is kept to a 25 MPH speed limit along that section of Route 7, whereas Routes 29 and 50 have 40 and 45 MPS speed limits. If you're the parent of a teen driver, you'd prefer your kids cross as few major highways.

#6: A cohort of Timber Lane-zoned kids may be left particularly isolated if they change AAP schools: The concern expressed here is that, if moved into the Falls Church pyramid, the Timber Lane AAP kids now at Haycock may be required to move to Mantua, the AAP center in the Woodson pyramid that most FCHS-zoned AAP kids attend. I'm not sure if this is correct (it's possible they'd be allowed to stay at Haycock), but it could be disruptive for those kids, just like any boundary changes will be to redistricted kids.

#7: There will be a loss of community cohesion: In essence, they argue that Timber Lane has been a part of the MHS community for 40 years and forged ties with others in that community. That is no doubt correct. School assignments create a sense of community just as geographic locations do, and when you change those assignments you fail to respect those bonds. It's an argument that people in Vienna would make if reassigned to schools in Reston or people in Great Falls would make if reassigned to schools in Herndon, and not ridiculous.

#8: The current Timber Lane split feeder is not lopsided: Here, they point out that the current split feeder at Timber Lane (60% to McLean, 40% to Falls Church) is fairly even, and not the type of lopsided split feeder that Thru has otherwise tried to address (i.e., certain split feeders below 25%). This is absolutely correct. If Timber Lane was not deemed an "attendance island," but only a split feeder, Thru might have left it untouched.

#9: Kilmer/Marshall were not identified as alternatives to Jackson/Falls Church: Here, they argue that, while they want to stay at Longfellow/McLean, Kilmer/Marshall would be a more reasonable alternative if they have to be moved. They are correct that FCPS staff/Thru did not provide the community with any options, but simply a recommendation to move to Jackson/Falls Church, even though Kilmer/Marshall is also contiguous to their area and there is part of the area (i.e., west of Hollywood Road) that Thru has proposed to move to Kilmer/Marshall. I don't know what the impact of moving the area to Kilmer/Marshall would be on the enrollment at Kilmer, which is overcrowded, but their point does underscore how Thru is proposing to carve up a relatively small area that's been at Longfellow/McLean for over 40 years and send them not just to one, but two, sets of new schools.

#10: A boundary study now is not a good idea given Trump, DOGE, etc.: This is an argument that many others have made and it's not ridiculous at all. Thru's analysis is based almost entirely on 2024-25 school enrollments, but it's unclear what those enrollments are going to look like in a few years given the efforts of Trump, DOGE, etc. to slash the federal government (and the spillover effects on the regional economy).

#11: The Timber Lane community was blindsided: They point out that the latest proposal to reassign the bulk of the Timber Lane area was not in any of the prior slide decks shared with the BRAC, so they were blindsided by the interactive map released earlier this month. At a minimum, this underscores that FCPS staff and Thru could and should have provided more information as to why the proposals in the interactive map changed from the prior proposals - what is driving these continued revisions? We should all want to have a better understanding of this.

#12: The McLean boundary was just recently adjusted: They note that the McLean HS boundaries were just adjusted four years ago and that it's unnecessary to change them yet again. This is not a ridiculous point. No high school community wants FCPS staff, much less some outside consultant with no local ties, adjusting its boundaries twice within a five-year period. It's destabilizing and demoralizing to the school community.

These are their main points, which you cavalierly dismiss as "absolutely weak and ridiculous." I think your attitude is unfortunate and almost repulsive, because it suggests that you're more than willing to disrepect people and ignore their concerns if they conflict with your own preferences. I could give multiple reasons why this community might do just fine at Falls Church, but they more than deserve to make their case that a move is unnecessary and be heard without being attacked.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

The majority of boundary changes ever made by school systems are not popular. People do not like change.

There's a special brand of smugness among those who want a local school board to go against the will of their constituents.

Not all constituents are against it. Just because YOU are and people of your ilk are doesn't means everyone is that selfish. The boundaries haven't changed in decades but the area has changed and grown significantly. Boundaries need to be changed unless you want some schools to have up to 40 students in a classroom within the next decade.

By "people of your ilk" you mean parents, who should have the greatest voice in school issues.

Are the parents the only ones paying for it?

Rezoning is more expensive.

So yes, the parents' voices should carry the most weight in the rezoning process.

Having kids in trailers and Modular’s is more expensive when there are high schools close by with room.

Trailers are cheap and modulars, once installed, are a sunk cost.

We should be spending more time asking why some of these schools have empty seats and less time plotting to move kids around like widgets.

Well, in regards to Falls Church HS and Langley HS it was because of very expensive renovations (many times more than a modular). We should get our money’s worth from both of them. Transfer students to both and lose the modular at McLean.

Get rid of all split feeders. Kids who go to elementary and middle school together should have the opportunity to graduate with each other. They should not be split up. Get rid of attendance islands too. Lets keep kids as close to their peers and schools as possible.

All of you screaming about kids having a say and maintaining the current community as a reason to push back against boundary adjustments are just using "politically correct" arguments that are code for you don't want your kids going to school with too many of "the poors".

Those arguments are reminiscent of those used by segregationists back in the 40s and 50s arguing against school integration. Examples of some of those arguments - People should have their own say in where their kids go to school. It's important to preserve continuity for their children. There will be weaker educational standards. What about Taxpayer rights? I've seen tidbits of all of these arguments made in this chain over the last couple of days.

At least be honest like the PP above who complained about FARM kids being behind and not wanting that to affect their child's education.

Oh please

South County parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent Lake Braddock.

Lake Braddock and West Springfield parents are upset about being rezoned to equivalent South County.

All of those schools are quite diverse with similar socioeconomic levels and similar communities.

People want to stay in their neighborhood schools, within their home communities, in the schools they were zoned for when they purchased their houses, where their kids have put down roots.

So we should keep attendance islands and split feeders because it'll be a little less convenient for some of you all in West Springfield and Lake Braddock. Got it. Maintaining schools within a specific pyramid (i.e. neighborhood/home community) by removing attendance islands and split feeders is not important unless it is the one you are currently in. God the entitlement on this board is so completely disturbing.

First you slur the people upset about their kids being rezoned as racist, jim crow segregationists.

My comment about the arguments against rezoning in this thread are reminiscent of those used during Jim Crow. You haven't even tried to deny it. Just deflecting. To be clear, I never called anyone racist. But, I do maintain that resorting to those arguments are for transparently self serving reasons rather than better for the district as a whole. Just as they were during Jim Crow.

Then, when the facts are presented to you that everyone with kids is upset, even families getting rezoned to equivalent SES, geographical and demographically similar schools, you switch from calling them modern klan types who are only upset because they don't want to mix with people you deam undesireable, to "entitled" and disturbing.

What facts are you pointing to? A couple other posters on a random thread on this message board? You think the small number of posters on this board are indicative of the population of Fairfax County at large? Again, I never called anyone racist. Just pointing out the similarity in transparent arguments to avoid undesired changes. Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

If you don't want me to see you as anything other than entitled, give me a coherent argument that maintaining split feeders and attendance islands are better in the aggregate for Fairfax County.

People don't want to get rezoned. Not to a worse school. Not to a better school. Not even to equivalent school

Apparently you have the pulse of the entire community? I imagine a lot of people would rather there kids not go to a split feeder school and would also prefer not to live on attendance islands. Same for parents who will be putting kids into the schools in the next few years. Just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

The only people in favor of rezoning are those who want to move other people's kids out of their neighborhood schools and into your school to improve your property value.

You know nothing about me. Regardless, this argument is demonstrably false. Otherwise, school boundary adjustments would never happen. Thru consulting would never have been retained and this whole ordeal would not exist. Again, just because you are loud and persistent does not make you right.

You pretty much called everyone who doesn't want their kids rezoned racists.

Telling them they are a modern version of jim crow is an ugly slur, and trope for aligning them to klansmen, the architects of jim crow.

All they want is for their kids to be left alone. There is nothing jim crow anout that.

I didnt call anyone racist. I said that people are using the same transparently self serving arguments that were used during Jim Crow to avoid integration. And the arguments are the same. Everyone wants their kids to be left alone in the situation that they are currently in. The status quo should be maintained. The District has a reasonable interest in addressing issues surrounding attendance islands and split feeders. Sorry it may not vibe with you wanting your kids to be left alone.

The underlined is calling people racist, clear as day.

I disagree. Please explain how saying the arguments used here by the anti-boundary adjustment crowd are the same used by those opposing integration in the civil rights era is equivalent to me calling someone racist. Apparently, my Fairfax County education is failing me.

It seems like you are just trying to dismiss my argument by accusing me of saying something which was not said because you lack an actual argument. I am willing to entertain this position though, if you can properly explain.

DP. What? You call people racist and then have the gall to say that they are trying to dismiss your argument. What a wackadoodle.

I never called anyone racist. Just said the same arguments are being used between those begging for the boundary status quo and those fighting integration during the civil rights era. You havent even tried to show that statement is false. Try again. Calling someone a clown, whackadoodle, Sandy or any other belittling name is the sign of someone without a decent argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, literally yesterday someone pointed to a talking points website which made absolutely clear that the problem was not redistricting but where the kids were redistricted to. Both McLean and Marshall were acceptable landing spots for kids from the elementary school in Falls Church, but FCHS was not. They provided a list of like 10 different arguments which were absolutely weak and ridiculous.

I am not from the Timber Lane area but I took a fresh look at that community's talking points, which you claim are "absolutely weak and ridiculous." Here is my assessment:

#1: It's inconsistent with equity goals to move the only Title I feeder out of McLean: I don't think this is a ridiculous argument. I ran some numbers and my estimate is that moving Timber Lane out of McLean reduces the FARMS rate at McLean from about 12% to 8%. It's a low percentage in either case, but if it's not absolutely necessary (and it isn't here) then why not preserve more economic diversity at one of the county's wealthier high schools?

#2: McLean has better programs and more opportunities than Falls Church (clubs, sports, AP): It's an accurate statement of fact, but a weak argument since Falls Church has plenty to offer.

#3: The Timber Lane attendance island is barely an attendance island: This is a fair argument. Not all attendance islands are alike. The Timber Lane island is an island primarily because of the boundary between the county and Falls Church City, and exacerbated by a land deal in the early 2010s in which the county and FCC swapped a parcel of land for a water utility. But it's not far removed from the main McLean attendance island and hardly as removed from McLean as, say, the western Fairfax HS attendance island is from Fairfax HS.

#4: The proposed boundary changes just shift overcrowding from McLean HS to Jackson HS: This is a weak argument because McLean would be at 100% capacity and Jackson under 105% capacity under Thru's proposals.

#5: The change would have negative safety impacts given that kids would now have to cross Routes 29 and 50: This is a reasonable argument given that traffic on Route 7, which those kids currenty cross, is kept to a 25 MPH speed limit along that section of Route 7, whereas Routes 29 and 50 have 40 and 45 MPS speed limits. If you're the parent of a teen driver, you'd prefer your kids cross as few major highways.

#6: A cohort of Timber Lane-zoned kids may be left particularly isolated if they change AAP schools: The concern expressed here is that, if moved into the Falls Church pyramid, the Timber Lane AAP kids now at Haycock may be required to move to Mantua, the AAP center in the Woodson pyramid that most FCHS-zoned AAP kids attend. I'm not sure if this is correct (it's possible they'd be allowed to stay at Haycock), but it could be disruptive for those kids, just like any boundary changes will be to redistricted kids.

#7: There will be a loss of community cohesion: In essence, they argue that Timber Lane has been a part of the MHS community for 40 years and forged ties with others in that community. That is no doubt correct. School assignments create a sense of community just as geographic locations do, and when you change those assignments you fail to respect those bonds. It's an argument that people in Vienna would make if reassigned to schools in Reston or people in Great Falls would make if reassigned to schools in Herndon, and not ridiculous.

#8: The current Timber Lane split feeder is not lopsided: Here, they point out that the current split feeder at Timber Lane (60% to McLean, 40% to Falls Church) is fairly even, and not the type of lopsided split feeder that Thru has otherwise tried to address (i.e., certain split feeders below 25%). This is absolutely correct. If Timber Lane was not deemed an "attendance island," but only a split feeder, Thru might have left it untouched.

#9: Kilmer/Marshall were not identified as alternatives to Jackson/Falls Church: Here, they argue that, while they want to stay at Longfellow/McLean, Kilmer/Marshall would be a more reasonable alternative if they have to be moved. They are correct that FCPS staff/Thru did not provide the community with any options, but simply a recommendation to move to Jackson/Falls Church, even though Kilmer/Marshall is also contiguous to their area and there is part of the area (i.e., west of Hollywood Road) that Thru has proposed to move to Kilmer/Marshall. I don't know what the impact of moving the area to Kilmer/Marshall would be on the enrollment at Kilmer, which is overcrowded, but their point does underscore how Thru is proposing to carve up a relatively small area that's been at Longfellow/McLean for over 40 years and send them not just to one, but two, sets of new schools.

#10: A boundary study now is not a good idea given Trump, DOGE, etc.: This is an argument that many others have made and it's not ridiculous at all. Thru's analysis is based almost entirely on 2024-25 school enrollments, but it's unclear what those enrollments are going to look like in a few years given the efforts of Trump, DOGE, etc. to slash the federal government (and the spillover effects on the regional economy).

#11: The Timber Lane community was blindsided: They point out that the latest proposal to reassign the bulk of the Timber Lane area was not in any of the prior slide decks shared with the BRAC, so they were blindsided by the interactive map released earlier this month. At a minimum, this underscores that FCPS staff and Thru could and should have provided more information as to why the proposals in the interactive map changed from the prior proposals - what is driving these continued revisions? We should all want to have a better understanding of this.

#12: The McLean boundary was just recently adjusted: They note that the McLean HS boundaries were just adjusted four years ago and that it's unnecessary to change them yet again. This is not a ridiculous point. No high school community wants FCPS staff, much less some outside consultant with no local ties, adjusting its boundaries twice within a five-year period. It's destabilizing and demoralizing to the school community.

These are their main points, which you cavalierly dismiss as "absolutely weak and ridiculous." I think your attitude is unfortunate and almost repulsive, because it suggests that you're more than willing to disrepect people and ignore their concerns if they conflict with your own preferences. I could give multiple reasons why this community might do just fine at Falls Church, but they more than deserve to make their case that a move is unnecessary and be heard without being attacked.

I disagree with quite a few of your conclusions. That said, I appreciate your analysis. It is constructive.