FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they try to move Waples to Fairfax, I hope Fairfax is ready for a barrage of lawsuits.

On what grounds? Look, many families across the county are going to get moved. Most people won't like it, especially the ones that are moving from a school that ranks higher to a school that ranks lower. There's overcapacity and undercapacity that needs to be fixed. This is from someone who will likely have her child shifted at his junior year in high school from one of the best schools in the county to one of the (if not the) worst in the county. I've been involved with my citizens association, written to the school board, written to the school administration trying to make my plea. But my house is equidistant to a number of high schools. Maybe my child will have to move. Maybe he won't. There isn't much more I can do. Who exactly are you suing? We were never guaranteed a specific high school when we bought our house.

DP. For the most part, there aren't acute issues with overcapacity or undercapacity in FCPS. Historically, the concern was more with overcrowding than undercapacity, and there are a lot of factors that could lead to lower enrollments in the coming years. The hot spots like Coates and Parklawn can be addressed without changing boundaries in every pyramid. Glasgow also wants a boundary change, but that's because they've just concluded it was an error to send that many kids to that school (it's fundamentally not a capacity/facilities issue).

The School Board depends on shills to push the narrative that there are systemic, critical issues that "need to be fixed," but this is primarily a solution in search of a problem, being pushed by far-left School Board members who would rather shuffle kids around than focus on meeting the needs of kids at their current schools.

[Anonymous]

It appears that they really do intend a fruitbasket turnover. I would love to see the budget and the planning for this. Have they given one thought beyond boundary lines? That is just the beginning. I've posted this before. Here is my list of things that I bet they are not considering:

Outside of buses and moving kids.

1. Programs--preschool special ed; AAP; language immersion; magnets; etc
2. Staffing--teachers; instructional assistants; counselors; specialists; LD; special ed; administration; psychologists; itinerant teachers (hearing, low vision, etc)
3. Technology
4. Materials, textbooks, other supplies
5. High school foreign languages are not necessarily the same in each high school
6. IB/AP
7. High school sports impact/booster clubs
8. Band/orchestra/chorus, etc. Some of these require tryouts
9. PTA
10. SACC and other child care options already set up in elementary schools
11. What grandfathering for elementary school shifts?
12. High school split siblings

These all require academic and logistical planning. If this is the major upset being described, do you trust Reid and the School Board to successfully implement?


8.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you get it now? Do you see my thought process?

The basis for sending Waples students to Fairfax high should NOT be the current boundary line for an as-yet unapproved development that currently houses a vacant commercial building. Redraw that boundary.

If the site was approved this month, it would still be years away. Surveys, permits, etc. Then, building and sales. It will be years and the population of both Oakton and Madison could shift downward--or upward.

But, you cannot take a site that is so close and send it somewhere else at this time. Way too many variables. Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton, I think?

If the site is years away, why make it basis for boundary changes now? It is a vacant commercial building. Yes, you are correct, “Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton”. Real students who live in established Oakton neighborhoods should not be sent to Fairfax high in favor of this development.

This push-back reveals that this development is REALLY important to someone at FCPS. Why? Why is that boundary being prioritized over established neighborhoods?

The trip from the AT&T site to Fairfax high is straight down 123, then left on 50. Super. Efficient. Bussing.

It is also a straight shot (2.4 miles away) to Katherine Johnson middle school. By contrast, Thoreau is 6.4 miles away, on the other side of Vienna.

So what makes more sense for that site? Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High?

Your Option 2 turns Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder to Fairfax, Madison, and Oakton. Not going to happen unless every Oakton HS-zoned neighborhood at Oakton ES gets moved to Fairfax, or the development gets assigned to a different ES than Oakton ES.

[Anonymous]

How are they going to determine which teachers get moved? Principal or seniority?

[Anonymous]

Attend the meeting for review of the AT&T site. Approval should be contingent on minimizing impact on established communities. Residents should press for the AT&T building to be zoned for Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High. That option makes the most sense in terms of community, student experience (students aren’t bussed to Thoreau, they go down the street) and minimal impact on established communities.

Easy. Fix. Make it happen, FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Just look at the map https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/elementarywithhighschoolpyramids_1.pdf If any school needs to move to Fairfax HS it should be Fairfax Villa. It fixes the island and keeps the FHS boundary in a more compact shape. It also helps with Woodson overcrowding, while Oakton HS has excess capacity.
The school board isn't considering the AT&T development yet because it hasn't started being built. I actually agree with their logic on that front. No use speculating on something that could be delayed years if interest rates shoot up, the economy tanks, or whatever else happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It appears that they really do intend a fruitbasket turnover. I would love to see the budget and the planning for this. Have they given one thought beyond boundary lines? That is just the beginning. I've posted this before. Here is my list of things that I bet they are not considering:

Outside of buses and moving kids.

1. Programs--preschool special ed; AAP; language immersion; magnets; etc
2. Staffing--teachers; instructional assistants; counselors; specialists; LD; special ed; administration; psychologists; itinerant teachers (hearing, low vision, etc)
3. Technology
4. Materials, textbooks, other supplies
5. High school foreign languages are not necessarily the same in each high school
6. IB/AP
7. High school sports impact/booster clubs
8. Band/orchestra/chorus, etc. Some of these require tryouts
9. PTA
10. SACC and other child care options already set up in elementary schools
11. What grandfathering for elementary school shifts?
12. High school split siblings

These all require academic and logistical planning. If this is the major upset being described, do you trust Reid and the School Board to successfully implement?

Good list. This whole exercise reeks of "shoot first and ask questions later." This is what we get when we elect frivolous idiots like Karl Frisch to the School Board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Attend the meeting for review of the AT&T site. Approval should be contingent on minimizing impact on established communities. Residents should press for the AT&T building to be zoned for Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High. That option makes the most sense in terms of community, student experience (students aren’t bussed to Thoreau, they go down the street) and minimal impact on established communities.

Easy. Fix. Make it happen, FCPS.

See prior post. They are not going to turn Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder.

Try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you get it now? Do you see my thought process?

The basis for sending Waples students to Fairfax high should NOT be the current boundary line for an as-yet unapproved development that currently houses a vacant commercial building. Redraw that boundary.

If the site was approved this month, it would still be years away. Surveys, permits, etc. Then, building and sales. It will be years and the population of both Oakton and Madison could shift downward--or upward.

But, you cannot take a site that is so close and send it somewhere else at this time. Way too many variables. Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton, I think?

If the site is years away, why make it basis for boundary changes now? It is a vacant commercial building. Yes, you are correct, “Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton”. Real students who live in established Oakton neighborhoods should not be sent to Fairfax high in favor of this development.

This push-back reveals that this development is REALLY important to someone at FCPS. Why? Why is that boundary being prioritized over established neighborhoods?

The trip from the AT&T site to Fairfax high is straight down 123, then left on 50. Super. Efficient. Bussing.

It is also a straight shot (2.4 miles away) to Katherine Johnson middle school. By contrast, Thoreau is 6.4 miles away, on the other side of Vienna.

So what makes more sense for that site? Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High?

Your Option 2 turns Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder to Fairfax, Madison, and Oakton. Not going to happen unless every Oakton HS-zoned neighborhood at Oakton ES gets moved to Fairfax, or the development gets assigned to a different ES than Oakton ES.

This does not make any sense. You are prioritizing maintaining Oakton ES dual feeder, at the expense of students being bussed across town to Thoreau? Wow. This would not have been a problem if Karl Frisch didn’t torpedo to ES planned for Blake lane. The money was there. The AT&T site could have fed into that ES then Johnson, then Fairfax high.

All this talk from FCPS reveals that so many decisions have already been made. That is a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attend the meeting for review of the AT&T site. Approval should be contingent on minimizing impact on established communities. Residents should press for the AT&T building to be zoned for Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High. That option makes the most sense in terms of community, student experience (students aren’t bussed to Thoreau, they go down the street) and minimal impact on established communities.

Easy. Fix. Make it happen, FCPS.

See prior post. They are not going to turn Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder.

Try again.

OK, how about this:
Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or

Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 3: Providence/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 4: Daniels Run/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Does this address split feeders? Both Providence and Daniels Run are under capacity.

[Anonymous]

Providence (and Katherine Johnson) are a straight shot, 5 minutes away, down Jermantown road from the AT&T site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you get it now? Do you see my thought process?

The basis for sending Waples students to Fairfax high should NOT be the current boundary line for an as-yet unapproved development that currently houses a vacant commercial building. Redraw that boundary.

If the site was approved this month, it would still be years away. Surveys, permits, etc. Then, building and sales. It will be years and the population of both Oakton and Madison could shift downward--or upward.

But, you cannot take a site that is so close and send it somewhere else at this time. Way too many variables. Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton, I think?

If the site is years away, why make it basis for boundary changes now? It is a vacant commercial building. Yes, you are correct, “Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton”. Real students who live in established Oakton neighborhoods should not be sent to Fairfax high in favor of this development.

This push-back reveals that this development is REALLY important to someone at FCPS. Why? Why is that boundary being prioritized over established neighborhoods?

The trip from the AT&T site to Fairfax high is straight down 123, then left on 50. Super. Efficient. Bussing.

It is also a straight shot (2.4 miles away) to Katherine Johnson middle school. By contrast, Thoreau is 6.4 miles away, on the other side of Vienna.

So what makes more sense for that site? Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High?

Your Option 2 turns Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder to Fairfax, Madison, and Oakton. Not going to happen unless every Oakton HS-zoned neighborhood at Oakton ES gets moved to Fairfax, or the development gets assigned to a different ES than Oakton ES.

This does not make any sense. You are prioritizing maintaining Oakton ES dual feeder, at the expense of students being bussed across town to Thoreau? Wow. This would not have been a problem if Karl Frisch didn’t torpedo to ES planned for Blake lane. The money was there. The AT&T site could have fed into that ES then Johnson, then Fairfax high.

All this talk from FCPS reveals that so many decisions have already been made. That is a problem.

I am telling you that FCPS is not going to create a three-way split feeder to Oakton ES at a time when minimizing split feeders is a clearly stated priority.

Come up with a different plan, and grow up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attend the meeting for review of the AT&T site. Approval should be contingent on minimizing impact on established communities. Residents should press for the AT&T building to be zoned for Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High. That option makes the most sense in terms of community, student experience (students aren’t bussed to Thoreau, they go down the street) and minimal impact on established communities.

Easy. Fix. Make it happen, FCPS.

See prior post. They are not going to turn Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder.

Try again.

OK, how about this:
Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or

Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 3: Providence/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 4: Daniels Run/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Does this address split feeders? Both Providence and Daniels Run are under capacity.

Option 3 is feasible, if you're prepared to bus kids further to Providence than to Oakton ES. It's pretty much straight down Jermantown Road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you get it now? Do you see my thought process?

The basis for sending Waples students to Fairfax high should NOT be the current boundary line for an as-yet unapproved development that currently houses a vacant commercial building. Redraw that boundary.

If the site was approved this month, it would still be years away. Surveys, permits, etc. Then, building and sales. It will be years and the population of both Oakton and Madison could shift downward--or upward.

But, you cannot take a site that is so close and send it somewhere else at this time. Way too many variables. Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton, I think?

If the site is years away, why make it basis for boundary changes now? It is a vacant commercial building. Yes, you are correct, “Waples Mill and Navy kids drive by that site on the way to Oakton”. Real students who live in established Oakton neighborhoods should not be sent to Fairfax high in favor of this development.

This push-back reveals that this development is REALLY important to someone at FCPS. Why? Why is that boundary being prioritized over established neighborhoods?

The trip from the AT&T site to Fairfax high is straight down 123, then left on 50. Super. Efficient. Bussing.

It is also a straight shot (2.4 miles away) to Katherine Johnson middle school. By contrast, Thoreau is 6.4 miles away, on the other side of Vienna.

So what makes more sense for that site? Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High?

Your Option 2 turns Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder to Fairfax, Madison, and Oakton. Not going to happen unless every Oakton HS-zoned neighborhood at Oakton ES gets moved to Fairfax, or the development gets assigned to a different ES than Oakton ES.

This does not make any sense. You are prioritizing maintaining Oakton ES dual feeder, at the expense of students being bussed across town to Thoreau? Wow. This would not have been a problem if Karl Frisch didn’t torpedo to ES planned for Blake lane. The money was there. The AT&T site could have fed into that ES then Johnson, then Fairfax high.

All this talk from FCPS reveals that so many decisions have already been made. That is a problem.

I am telling you that FCPS is not going to create a three-way split feeder to Oakton ES at a time when minimizing split feeders is a clearly stated priority.

Come up with a different plan, and grow up.

Grow up? There is no need to be dismissive.

Apparently you missed my response, above:

OK, how about this:
Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or

Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 3: Providence/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 4: Daniels Run/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Does this address split feeders? Both Providence and Daniels Run are under capacity.

Both Providence and Katherine Johnson are a straight, less than 5 minutes, drive from the AT&T site.

Any thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Attend the meeting for review of the AT&T site. Approval should be contingent on minimizing impact on established communities. Residents should press for the AT&T building to be zoned for Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High. That option makes the most sense in terms of community, student experience (students aren’t bussed to Thoreau, they go down the street) and minimal impact on established communities.

Easy. Fix. Make it happen, FCPS.

See prior post. They are not going to turn Oakton ES into a three-way split feeder.

Try again.

OK, how about this:
Option 1: Oakton/Thoreau/Oakton, or

Option 2: Oakton/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 3: Providence/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Option 4: Daniels Run/Katherine Johnson/Fairfax High

Does this address split feeders? Both Providence and Daniels Run are under capacity.

Option 3 is feasible, if you're prepared to bus kids further to Providence than to Oakton ES. It's pretty much straight down Jermantown Road.

Yes, it is a little bit further, but if it removes a split feeders, that is better, right? And kids would go to the middle school right next to their elementary school.