FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

[Anonymous]

Raze not raise- sorry!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

Hate? Why is speaking up against a community that has an HOA, is encouraging people who don’t even have kids who will be affected to attend meetings that aren’t in their zone equivalent to hate?
It sounds like a community that has tract housing and was named by a developer. This is its truth.
Free speech goes both ways and I think their tactics run contrary to the idea the all voices should be heard and they are attempting to be the loudest/strongest voice so they can be heard. I disagree with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

Hate? Why is speaking up against a community that has an HOA, is encouraging people who don’t even have kids who will be affected to attend meetings that aren’t in their zone equivalent to hate?
It sounds like a community that has tract housing and was named by a developer. This is its truth.
Free speech goes both ways and I think their tactics run contrary to the idea the all voices should be heard and they are attempting to be the loudest/strongest voice so they can be heard. I disagree with that.

If your issue was really just with tactics, you wouldn't have felt the need to be snobby about their community or housing type. You look down on them and that has nothing to do with the Boundary Policy. It's gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

The community meetings shouldn’t be a directionless free for all. There should have been a meeting per impacted pyramid. Therefore they could get meaningful feedback for those impacted areas, and Emerald Chase would only have to frenzy click during the Chantilly meeting.

Thru’s process of focusing on the Top 5 comments is lazy, pitting neighbors against neighbors, and is (everyone’s favorite buzz word) inequitable to communities who don’t have the resources to spam pigeonhole every other night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

Hate? Why is speaking up against a community that has an HOA, is encouraging people who don’t even have kids who will be affected to attend meetings that aren’t in their zone equivalent to hate?
It sounds like a community that has tract housing and was named by a developer. This is its truth.
Free speech goes both ways and I think their tactics run contrary to the idea the all voices should be heard and they are attempting to be the loudest/strongest voice so they can be heard. I disagree with that.

If your issue was really just with tactics, you wouldn't have felt the need to be snobby about their community or housing type. You look down on them and that has nothing to do with the Boundary Policy. It's gross.

The tactics they are using are directly connected to the type of housing they are in. If you live in an area with no HOA- you are not easily organizing around your HOA and getting retired folks, DINKS etc in on the game because you don’t have an HOA or your HOA isn’t that large.

I’m attacking the type of community precisely because it is the structure of the community which is allowing them to take over the comments section.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

Hate? Why is speaking up against a community that has an HOA, is encouraging people who don’t even have kids who will be affected to attend meetings that aren’t in their zone equivalent to hate?
It sounds like a community that has tract housing and was named by a developer. This is its truth.
Free speech goes both ways and I think their tactics run contrary to the idea the all voices should be heard and they are attempting to be the loudest/strongest voice so they can be heard. I disagree with that.

If your issue was really just with tactics, you wouldn't have felt the need to be snobby about their community or housing type. You look down on them and that has nothing to do with the Boundary Policy. It's gross.

The tactics they are using are directly connected to the type of housing they are in. If you live in an area with no HOA- you are not easily organizing around your HOA and getting retired folks, DINKS etc in on the game because you don’t have an HOA or your HOA isn’t that large.

I’m attacking the type of community precisely because it is the structure of the community which is allowing them to take over the comments section.

Woah...now do apartments. Yikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

The community meetings shouldn’t be a directionless free for all. There should have been a meeting per impacted pyramid. Therefore they could get meaningful feedback for those impacted areas, and Emerald Chase would only have to frenzy click during the Chantilly meeting.

Thru’s process of focusing on the Top 5 comments is lazy, pitting neighbors against neighbors, and is (everyone’s favorite buzz word) inequitable to communities who don’t have the resources to spam pigeonhole every other night.

Agree. They should have done this much differently than they did. But the digital comments are what is going to become the formal record of community comments so I don't see why any upset community wouldn't take this approach. It's completely a result of how lazy FCPS set up the community feedback process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

Hate? Why is speaking up against a community that has an HOA, is encouraging people who don’t even have kids who will be affected to attend meetings that aren’t in their zone equivalent to hate?
It sounds like a community that has tract housing and was named by a developer. This is its truth.
Free speech goes both ways and I think their tactics run contrary to the idea the all voices should be heard and they are attempting to be the loudest/strongest voice so they can be heard. I disagree with that.

If your issue was really just with tactics, you wouldn't have felt the need to be snobby about their community or housing type. You look down on them and that has nothing to do with the Boundary Policy. It's gross.

The tactics they are using are directly connected to the type of housing they are in. If you live in an area with no HOA- you are not easily organizing around your HOA and getting retired folks, DINKS etc in on the game because you don’t have an HOA or your HOA isn’t that large.

I’m attacking the type of community precisely because it is the structure of the community which is allowing them to take over the comments section.

Woah...now do apartments. Yikes.

Why would I do that? Those parents should have a say too, but they aren’t jamming up the comments section.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

Hate? Why is speaking up against a community that has an HOA, is encouraging people who don’t even have kids who will be affected to attend meetings that aren’t in their zone equivalent to hate?
It sounds like a community that has tract housing and was named by a developer. This is its truth.
Free speech goes both ways and I think their tactics run contrary to the idea the all voices should be heard and they are attempting to be the loudest/strongest voice so they can be heard. I disagree with that.

If your issue was really just with tactics, you wouldn't have felt the need to be snobby about their community or housing type. You look down on them and that has nothing to do with the Boundary Policy. It's gross.

+1

[Anonymous]

A friend sent me a screenshot of a poster calling out families who send their kids to St. James instead of their zoned elementary school. I can't find the post to comment.

We bought our land and built a house zoned for the middle and high school we wanted for our kids, not the elementary school. With the proposed scenarios, it seems like that may not happen. We have three options: fight, comply, or move. We're going to start by fighting. Families do what they feel is best for their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very curious if most of the pro rezoning posts from the past 10-20 pages are from just 1-2 people posting repeatedly.

The pro-boundary update people watching the thread have very little incentive to post. If someone posts how they'd like to fix their split feeder they are hounded incessantly by claims of "you just want to hurt the mental health of my kids", or "you're just trying to increase your property value at the expense of others" (the Emerald Chase people come to mind most recently) - all the while the people posting against them are happy to do the same to keep the status quo. I notice hardly any Emerald Chase people post here anymore because of it.
You don't have the super majority you think you have. It's just an echo chamber in here.

If you are posting the majority of the posts in support of boundary changes here, then it is likely that you have as little support throughout FCPS as you do here.

No, usually I post maybe once a week - twice if I reply to someone afterward. I'm not in a split feeder ES, but one kid basically was because of AAP. He was split from his friends where roughly 30% of the kids go to the center - so it's a situation Thru wouldn't have addressed either. Now he goes to Carson for AAP where he'll be split from most of his peers once again for high school. Split feeders are not ideal and should be eliminated whenever possible. The only people okay with them are the ones that are just happy they got the "better" end of the split for their future middle and high school and don't want it fixed if they end up somewhere "worse."

DP but you could have left him at Franklin for AAP with more kids who are going to go to his High School but you didn't. You did this to your own child.

I let him choose. How many of his classmates do you think chose to go to Franklin with kids they haven't seen since 2nd grade? Almost none. They all go to Carson to be with their friends from the last 4 years. Middle school already sucks. No one wants to go to a school where they don't know anyone.

What a bizarre thing to say!! Your son was ONLY friends with kids in his AAP class for the past four years? And he's not making ANY new friends in middle school? He's sticking with just his elementary school AAP friends? And I guess this means he'll stay friends with JUST those kids in high school? No new friends there, either? How sad.

By the way, so interesting how all the other Navy moms insist that there is no segregation between the AAP kids and the regular kids, and that they mix for specials and lunch and stay friends with each other all through ES, but here you are telling me that your child didn't know a single non-AAP person in his grade????

NP - different kid, different schools but I would say, yes, it is a very typical experience for AAP kids to be “segregated” from the other kids. Not saying that is a good thing. In my kid’s particular situation I’m not sure if things would have changed in HS because we moved. His circle is pretty much kids who take ap and honors classes though.

[Anonymous]

Gotta love how FCPS pits neighborhoods against neighborhood. What a great county we live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gotta love how FCPS pits neighborhoods against neighborhood. What a great county we live in.

Hello county of 1 million residents, we will acknowledge your top 5 upvoted comments on the impacts to your 198 schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At the Lewis meeting this evening, the overwhelming sentiment was against boundary changes. Always great to have to burn a Friday evening to help FCPS discover the obvious.

Any Lewis parents there? Anyone tell them to drop IB?

The pigeonhole (?) board has 240+ votes for Emerald Chase and whatever they want, but most comments are “please don’t do this right now”

Emerald Chase is flooding the Lewis meeting?

That is even more ridiculous than them flooding the Robinson meeting

There was one Emerald Chase post that got upvoted tonight surrounded by a bunch about Timberlane, Falls Hill, Hunt Valley, McLean, etc. some of you need to find a new boogeyman

It was upvoted exponentially more than any other comment. It is pretty clear what emerald chase is doing. The others had more comments but only a few upvotes. But emerald chase sounds like a raise the trees and put up tract housing kind of place, so the Astro turfing of meetings fits the community.

Not an Emerald Chase parent. They heard comments that they inappropriately flooded the meeting and backed off. Since then, they put in one comment and let people upvote it. That's no different than what other impacted communities are doing. Or non-impacted communities. There is always a residency check comment, always a SACC comment, always a grandfathering comment. I would be very surprised if the same people aren't logging in to make their points stronger. This is the way they designed the feedback so this is how people are going to play it.

By the end of the night, there were 200+ votes for comments about leaving HV alone, leaving Vienna ES along, and not swapping McLean and Marshall students for no reason. The most frequent comment was about Timber Lane.

Is there a reason you need to hate other places so much? So what if it's the kind of place where they rushed in to put tract housing? People live there. They raise their kids there. They deserve to have their concerns heard.

Hate? Why is speaking up against a community that has an HOA, is encouraging people who don’t even have kids who will be affected to attend meetings that aren’t in their zone equivalent to hate?
It sounds like a community that has tract housing and was named by a developer. This is its truth.
Free speech goes both ways and I think their tactics run contrary to the idea the all voices should be heard and they are attempting to be the loudest/strongest voice so they can be heard. I disagree with that.

If your issue was really just with tactics, you wouldn't have felt the need to be snobby about their community or housing type. You look down on them and that has nothing to do with the Boundary Policy. It's gross.

+1

So you think calling out a tract development as a tract development and saying they can more easily organize thanks to their HOA is a greater evil than attempting to drown out the voices of those who don’t live in a tract development. Talk about gross!