Forum Index
»
Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
FCPS comprehensive boundary review
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Agree. From the process chart at the 2/10 meeting, it does not look like they will have community provide feedback on the specific changes. It seems the community doesn’t see the changes until they are approved. I also have concerns on what basis decisions are made. It is community feedback vs their agenda |
Anonymous
Yes! |
Anonymous
I don’t know if the leaked map is a troll or not. The stake is very high. Even if the likelihood may not be high, I still want to take it seriously. We do not know how much more importance they put on FARMS over the other goals. |
Anonymous
The leaked map says WMES moves from Oakton HS to Fairfax HS. So essentially, it is a swap with Greenbrier East. Even though Oakton HS just had an expansion, they won’t be able to accommodate the families in the existing zone, plus the new developments to be built at Metro West and AT&T, plus addition of Greenbrier East |
Anonymous
Hunt Valley from WSHS to Lewis. |
Anonymous
Just stop. These changes may not be proposed, or alternatively dozens of others could be proposed as well. These posts suggesting a small number of proposed changes are a sure thing serve no useful purpose. |
Anonymous
There it is. That’s where this is coming from for Waples. https://www.ffxnow.com/2024/01/02/plan-for-mixed-use-development-at-atts-oakton-campus-officially-submitted/ FCPS just tipped their hand. FCPS is favoring a speculative 1000 new rental units over a long-established community. I wonder who on the board has received donations from the entity behind this development? I would also be interested to know what contact this entity has had with FCPS as part of this boundary review. You can rent apartments for a lot more if they feed into Oakton high rather than Fairfax high…. This is how developers work. Look at the casino push in Tysons. The comments “Waples will lose this fight” seemed to be informed by insights into the type influence that these developers have over the elected school board officials and FCPS officials. All of this “community outreach” is window dressing to cover for a decision that was already made based on corrupt influence. All of this will come out in discovery. |
Anonymous
That is from 2024. What is the current status? |
Anonymous
There were 2 or 3 ES said to move to Lewis and, despite what the Lewis booster on here always says, only room for 1 more school at Lewis. Especially a big school like Hunt Valley. So I’m skeptical. |
Anonymous
I love a good conspiracy as much as the next person, but the new development you're referring to at the former ATT site is already zoned to Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton. |
Anonymous
googled and found: https://www.optionsforoakton.org/ Hearing this month. Not yet approved. If you are Waples Mill, I would attend. |
Anonymous
|
This is why there has been a lack of transparency. It’s not only about illegal boundary redraws where race is the primary factor (what we have here so far qualifies). It’s about the same thing local government capture is always about: making money off the public.
FCPS should not prioritize speculative developments from deep pockets over established communities. Students with an Oakton address that live in neighborhoods in the Oakton high pyramid should not be redrawn to Fairfax high to satisfy government corruption and troubling conflicts of interests. Write to your rep. Ask about these issues. Ask for meaningful participation in the process. Meaningful participation would include: a) FCPS issuing a draft proposal for changes that increases transparency. b) FCPS provides communities with a meaningful opportunity to comment on these draft proposals BEFORE decisions are made. c) FCPS fully addresses how community comments on draft proposals. This important. currently, community feedback is not informed by FCPS thinking or draft proposals. That leaves the community data collection sessions to serve only one purpose: to justify, retrospectively, decisions that have already been made (and are driven by developers, not impacted communities). In order to enable community members to provide meaningful data to FCPS, a draft proposal from FCOS should include: 1) for each boundary change, the basis / factors / community needs that necessitate each change 2) the alternatives that were considered to meet these community needs without making a boundary change 3) how the boundary change is a better solution community needs than the alternatives that do not require a boundary change All of the above could be set forth in tabular format similar to what FCPS already does in its annual CIP. This way, communities can give meaningful data and feedback to FCPS that further informs their analysis. For example, if Waples must move to avoid a split feeder, how does swapping Waples and portions of Greenbrier East to create make portions of Greenbrier East an attendance island (and maintaining that school as a split feeder) meet this need? Write your reps! Ask them what contact the developers and their agents have had with FCPS as part of this process. Shouldn’t community member get meaningful participation too? It are just providing “data” that will be used to justify a corrupt decision that has already been made? |
Anonymous
You sound like someone who talks about the Tyson’s casino as “a done deal.” All you have done is confirmed that this development, which is not yet approved, is the basis for moving students. Nicely done. Thank you. Students who live in Oakton in neighborhoods that have attended Oakton high for decades should not be moved in the basis of the undue, corrupt influence of a handful of developers. |
Anonymous
|
Talk to your reps. Write letters. Get organized! The school board should prioritize students and their communities!
If FCOS has no concerns about the basis for their proposals, what is the harm of providing the community with an opportunity for meaningful feedback, as noted above? Just issue it in tabular form that identifies the bases and alternatives considered. Then allow for meaning feedback. A refusal to act transparently is problematic and invites costly litigation |
Anonymous
Looks to me like this could be years away. And, who knows what the membership of Oakton will be then. But, that does not make the developers "corrupt." Wouldn't Oakton be the closest high school? |