FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

See 21:46. If you have a credible reason to believe that the new development at the old AT&T site is somehow going to push kids in existing Oakton neighborhoods into Fairfax, I think arguing strongly for Option 3 makes a lot of sense. Chip away wherever you can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

See 21:46. If you have a credible reason to believe that the new development at the old AT&T site is somehow going to push kids in existing Oakton neighborhoods into Fairfax, I think arguing strongly for Option 3 makes a lot of sense. Chip away wherever you can.

Thank you, that is very helpful. I appreciate your insights on what is workable/favored.

[Anonymous]

Waples Mill is much closer to Johnson than Franklin…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Waples Mill is much closer to Johnson than Franklin…

Yes, that is true. But shouldn’t the Oakton community get an opportunity to comment on whether the difference in drive time between Franklin and Johnson is more important than sending Oakton neighborhoods to Fairfax high?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

See 21:46. If you have a credible reason to believe that the new development at the old AT&T site is somehow going to push kids in existing Oakton neighborhoods into Fairfax, I think arguing strongly for Option 3 makes a lot of sense. Chip away wherever you can.

I am not at all impacted by these moves. However, just think, with what the SB is planning, these types of decisions pitting neighborhood against neighborhood, will be going on throughout Fairfax County.

This is not good for the families, the children, or the citizens of Fairfax County. It is disruptive and divisive.

[Anonymous]

At this point, I'd be all for them just erasing the boundary maps and starting all over. Keep it simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At this point, I'd be all for them just erasing the boundary maps and starting all over. Keep it simple.

Starting on a blank slate with respect to boundaries, without considering the differences in programs at different schools, is an exercise in being deliberately obtuse.

[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?

Who would you trust with this task? Would you abide by their decisions even if it meant your kids had to move to a new school?


8.

[Anonymous]

I have no trust in Reid and the School Board to implement boundary changes effectively. Absolutely none.

These are the same folks who bungled Hayfield and are wasting tens of millions of taxpayer money on the totally unnecessary Dunn Loring ES. Those were discrete issues; this is a far more complex undertaking. Yet they have no appreciation for the limits of their own competence, and they will make a total hash of things. If you think things are getting ugly now, just wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no trust in Reid and the School Board to implement boundary changes effectively. Absolutely none.

These are the same folks who bungled Hayfield and are wasting tens of millions of taxpayer money on the totally unnecessary Dunn Loring ES. Those were discrete issues; this is a far more complex undertaking. Yet they have no appreciation for the limits of their own competence, and they will make a total hash of things. If you think things are getting ugly now, just wait.

If you want to see ugly, just wait until they start moving teachers and other staff.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The “leaked” map creates even more high school attendance islands. Moving Waples Mill severs Oakton’s boundaries to Crossfield/Navy and Oakview to Robinson cuts off Woodson from Fairfax Villa. Also, why move Fairhill from newly expanded Falls Church HS (which also would be an attendance island to Fairfax HS?)

They’d need to drastically shift elementary school boundaries for any of this to make sense.

Hunt Valley is the farthest WSHS school from Lewis.

This leaked map just does not make sense.

It's also the farthest from WSHS.....

Most of it is actually closer to WSHS than Daventry and a lot of Keene Mill

That’s not true. Keene mill are walkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have no trust in Reid and the School Board to implement boundary changes effectively. Absolutely none.

These are the same folks who bungled Hayfield and are wasting tens of millions of taxpayer money on the totally unnecessary Dunn Loring ES. Those were discrete issues; this is a far more complex undertaking. Yet they have no appreciation for the limits of their own competence, and they will make a total hash of things. If you think things are getting ugly now, just wait.

If you want to see ugly, just wait until they start moving teachers and other staff.....

Good point. How does that work? If school A loses students in the rezoning and school B across the county gains students (not as a result school A’s loss), are teachers forced to move?

[Anonymous]

Wouldn't it make the most sense, least complaining, to simply build some new schools in most desirable areas, no complaints presumably, then shift everyone to a better nearby school who needs to be moved between older schools? Think of it like dominos. Kids at school F shift to D, D shifts to C, C to B, and so forth.

[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:The “leaked” map creates even more high school attendance islands. Moving Waples Mill severs Oakton’s boundaries to Crossfield/Navy and Oakview to Robinson cuts off Woodson from Fairfax Villa. Also, why move Fairhill from newly expanded Falls Church HS (which also would be an attendance island to Fairfax HS?)

They’d need to drastically shift elementary school boundaries for any of this to make sense.

Hunt Valley is the farthest WSHS school from Lewis.

This leaked map just does not make sense.

It's also the farthest from WSHS.....

It doesn't make sense to me either, but if they are really looking to move a whole elementary school out of WSHS, Hunt Valley is the only option. I think there are better ways to alleviate the "crowding" (which I'm not fully convinced of) at WSHS, but nonetheless, if a whole elementary is gonna go, it's gonna be HV.

You really aren't making any sense.

If you were arguing to move HV to South County or Keene Mill to Lewis, you might have credibility.

But arguing that Hunt Valley should be moved past 5 other WSHS zoned elementary schools all the way to Lewis completely destroys any argument you have.

Makes perfect sense. The farthest school from WSHS should move to Lewis . How does that not make sense. We need more kids at Lewis, not South County. Stop with this argument.

No it doesn't.

They are the farthest elementary school to Lewis.

The person who is insistent on this has argued it for months and says that the entirety of the HV boundary should be bussed to key and Lewis because they are out of walking zone to WSHS and Irving.

I am a HV parent and plan to move but I’m thinking SC.

But I also don’t trust or believe Reid and I’m sure she already has a plan and will do what she wants.

I actually believe it’s more that there are a few school board members (Sandy Anderson, St John Cunning, McDaniel) who want to stick it to certain schools. I’m thinking that Reid and other school board members are just negligent bystanders. Though Robyn Lady is likely looking to get a boost in her own property value.

I really believe that the SB member’s kids should all be required to move schools as part of this process. Since they don’t see any downside to the changes they should be fine with this.

Sandy Anderson is not looking to stick it to HV. If anything, she reassured the dozens of HV parents who contacted her after that fake news article published last Summer about HVES moving to Lewis. Her office created a statement to the effect of "Lewis is not the closest or second closest HS to HVES, and HVES is not the closest or second closest WSHS pyramid ES to Lewis, so it would not make sense to move it to Lewis."

Honestly don’t know why the HVES rumor started. It physically cannot be all of HVES.

Lewis has ~230 extra seats right now. HVES is the largest ES in the WSHS pyramid and contributes ~500 HS students to WSHS. They are not going to move 500 kids into 230 seats.

It’s that simple.

Lewis current enrollment - 1631
Lewis design capacity (CIP) - 2139

Room for 508 more students. The number you are using is Program Capacity (the one that gives you 230 available seats), but that can grow or shrink.

The design capacity was expanded in the 2005 timeframe at the same time they ended up moving out over three hundred students in the wake of South County opening. In the 2005 timeframe Lee had around 2100 students. So they expanded it and then immediately moved out students so that the expansion was wasted. But they can fix that now.

County did a similar thing with Springfield Estates. It was overcrowded because of the AAP program. They expanded it to hold all of those students, then turned around and opened another AAP center in the Edison pyramid and pulling students away from Springfield Estates, wasting the expansion. This county has been a terrible steward of our tax dollars.

My point is that moving the entirety of HVES is not feasible.

Adding 500 kids to Lewis puts it at 113% program capacity and 100% design capacity. Why set up overcrowding? They’re more likely to nibble at the edges. Or move a smaller, closer school like WSES.

[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:The “leaked” map creates even more high school attendance islands. Moving Waples Mill severs Oakton’s boundaries to Crossfield/Navy and Oakview to Robinson cuts off Woodson from Fairfax Villa. Also, why move Fairhill from newly expanded Falls Church HS (which also would be an attendance island to Fairfax HS?)

They’d need to drastically shift elementary school boundaries for any of this to make sense.

Hunt Valley is the farthest WSHS school from Lewis.

This leaked map just does not make sense.

It's also the farthest from WSHS.....

It doesn't make sense to me either, but if they are really looking to move a whole elementary school out of WSHS, Hunt Valley is the only option. I think there are better ways to alleviate the "crowding" (which I'm not fully convinced of) at WSHS, but nonetheless, if a whole elementary is gonna go, it's gonna be HV.

You really aren't making any sense.

If you were arguing to move HV to South County or Keene Mill to Lewis, you might have credibility.

But arguing that Hunt Valley should be moved past 5 other WSHS zoned elementary schools all the way to Lewis completely destroys any argument you have.

Makes perfect sense. The farthest school from WSHS should move to Lewis . How does that not make sense. We need more kids at Lewis, not South County. Stop with this argument.

No it doesn't.

They are the farthest elementary school to Lewis.

The person who is insistent on this has argued it for months and says that the entirety of the HV boundary should be bussed to key and Lewis because they are out of walking zone to WSHS and Irving.

I am a HV parent and plan to move but I’m thinking SC.

But I also don’t trust or believe Reid and I’m sure she already has a plan and will do what she wants.

I actually believe it’s more that there are a few school board members (Sandy Anderson, St John Cunning, McDaniel) who want to stick it to certain schools. I’m thinking that Reid and other school board members are just negligent bystanders. Though Robyn Lady is likely looking to get a boost in her own property value.

I really believe that the SB member’s kids should all be required to move schools as part of this process. Since they don’t see any downside to the changes they should be fine with this.

Sandy Anderson is not looking to stick it to HV. If anything, she reassured the dozens of HV parents who contacted her after that fake news article published last Summer about HVES moving to Lewis. Her office created a statement to the effect of "Lewis is not the closest or second closest HS to HVES, and HVES is not the closest or second closest WSHS pyramid ES to Lewis, so it would not make sense to move it to Lewis."

Honestly don’t know why the HVES rumor started. It physically cannot be all of HVES.

Lewis has ~230 extra seats right now. HVES is the largest ES in the WSHS pyramid and contributes ~500 HS students to WSHS. They are not going to move 500 kids into 230 seats.

It’s that simple.

Lewis current enrollment - 1631
Lewis design capacity (CIP) - 2139

Room for 508 more students. The number you are using is Program Capacity (the one that gives you 230 available seats), but that can grow or shrink.

The design capacity was expanded in the 2005 timeframe at the same time they ended up moving out over three hundred students in the wake of South County opening. In the 2005 timeframe Lee had around 2100 students. So they expanded it and then immediately moved out students so that the expansion was wasted. But they can fix that now.

County did a similar thing with Springfield Estates. It was overcrowded because of the AAP program. They expanded it to hold all of those students, then turned around and opened another AAP center in the Edison pyramid and pulling students away from Springfield Estates, wasting the expansion. This county has been a terrible steward of our tax dollars.

My point is that moving the entirety of HVES is not feasible.

Adding 500 kids to Lewis puts it at 113% program capacity and 100% design capacity. Why set up overcrowding? They’re more likely to nibble at the edges. Or move a smaller, closer school like WSES.

WS is currently well over its Design Capacity.