King Abdullah Academy Closing: FCPS Buy for HS?

[Anonymous]

I see pros and cons for both! However the boundary sketching has gotten out of hand! Everyone should have several good options to choose from easily. So I do see the school choice option as a better concept for consistency over time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is needed! We can’t really be free until we have the freedom to choose our education options just as anything else!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why you guys are going on about all of this?! Dems are always excited about new projects until they drop the ball. Wait till school choice becomes a thing in this area - I hope Trump will at least get that done before his time is up.

You do understand that school choice is a state issue and not a national issue? The Federal Government doesn't have a say on school choice.

Will be a Federal issue once this bill is signed into law - https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/833/text

Haha and schools will be free to reject you.

DP, sure the schools can reject whoever they want, but the flip side is that they can accept whoever they want, and they don’t need to justify anything to you.

Again for those in the back, at some point FCPS has to decide if it wants UMC kids in the school system or not. If they do, they’re going to have to change the way they disregard these families.

The consistent problem is poor facilities planning and random decisions that come out of the blue with inadequate notice.

You get an addition, someone else gets told there's no money. You get told to expect boundary changes after boundary changes, someone else gets a new school that no one was expecting. You could be an UMC family that benefits or an UMC family that gets screwed.

But there's no real transparency or consistency, and all their BS about doing a "holistic" review isn't changing any of that.

UMC families can typically afford private, so FCPS is competing against those schools for these UMC students. I have consistently heard stability and predictability in school pyramids matter to this cohort, but the threat of boundary changes has the effect of doing the opposite.

Long term, UMC families will continue to migrate to private schools (we’re talking about potentially making the move for our kids). I know others who have already made the switch.

Agree. We've got Sandy Anderson at the work session today urging Dr. Reid to discount the views of parents who actually organize to make their voices heard. The hostility is very real, and it's not lost on people.

Are the work sessions available to watch?

Yes, today's work session just concluded, but it will be archived. Usually they post the archived version on You Tube, etc., within a day or so.

Is this it? 5 hours?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CzzCW2t-k-g&pp=0gcJCdQJAYcqIYzv

Yes. They got it posted very quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is needed! We can’t really be free until we have the freedom to choose our education options just as anything else!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why you guys are going on about all of this?! Dems are always excited about new projects until they drop the ball. Wait till school choice becomes a thing in this area - I hope Trump will at least get that done before his time is up.

You do understand that school choice is a state issue and not a national issue? The Federal Government doesn't have a say on school choice.

Will be a Federal issue once this bill is signed into law - https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/833/text

Haha and schools will be free to reject you.

DP, sure the schools can reject whoever they want, but the flip side is that they can accept whoever they want, and they don’t need to justify anything to you.

Again for those in the back, at some point FCPS has to decide if it wants UMC kids in the school system or not. If they do, they’re going to have to change the way they disregard these families.

The consistent problem is poor facilities planning and random decisions that come out of the blue with inadequate notice.

You get an addition, someone else gets told there's no money. You get told to expect boundary changes after boundary changes, someone else gets a new school that no one was expecting. You could be an UMC family that benefits or an UMC family that gets screwed.

But there's no real transparency or consistency, and all their BS about doing a "holistic" review isn't changing any of that.

UMC families can typically afford private, so FCPS is competing against those schools for these UMC students. I have consistently heard stability and predictability in school pyramids matter to this cohort, but the threat of boundary changes has the effect of doing the opposite.

Long term, UMC families will continue to migrate to private schools (we’re talking about potentially making the move for our kids). I know others who have already made the switch.

Agree. We've got Sandy Anderson at the work session today urging Dr. Reid to discount the views of parents who actually organize to make their voices heard. The hostility is very real, and it's not lost on people.

Are the work sessions available to watch?

Yes, today's work session just concluded, but it will be archived. Usually they post the archived version on You Tube, etc., within a day or so.

Is this it? 5 hours?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CzzCW2t-k-g&pp=0gcJCdQJAYcqIYzv

Yes. They got it posted very quickly.

I went through it quickly so maybe I missed it, but I didn't really hear much mention of the new school being factored into the existing boundary study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is needed! We can’t really be free until we have the freedom to choose our education options just as anything else!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why you guys are going on about all of this?! Dems are always excited about new projects until they drop the ball. Wait till school choice becomes a thing in this area - I hope Trump will at least get that done before his time is up.

You do understand that school choice is a state issue and not a national issue? The Federal Government doesn't have a say on school choice.

Will be a Federal issue once this bill is signed into law - https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/833/text

Haha and schools will be free to reject you.

DP, sure the schools can reject whoever they want, but the flip side is that they can accept whoever they want, and they don’t need to justify anything to you.

Again for those in the back, at some point FCPS has to decide if it wants UMC kids in the school system or not. If they do, they’re going to have to change the way they disregard these families.

The consistent problem is poor facilities planning and random decisions that come out of the blue with inadequate notice.

You get an addition, someone else gets told there's no money. You get told to expect boundary changes after boundary changes, someone else gets a new school that no one was expecting. You could be an UMC family that benefits or an UMC family that gets screwed.

But there's no real transparency or consistency, and all their BS about doing a "holistic" review isn't changing any of that.

UMC families can typically afford private, so FCPS is competing against those schools for these UMC students. I have consistently heard stability and predictability in school pyramids matter to this cohort, but the threat of boundary changes has the effect of doing the opposite.

Long term, UMC families will continue to migrate to private schools (we’re talking about potentially making the move for our kids). I know others who have already made the switch.

Agree. We've got Sandy Anderson at the work session today urging Dr. Reid to discount the views of parents who actually organize to make their voices heard. The hostility is very real, and it's not lost on people.

Are the work sessions available to watch?

Yes, today's work session just concluded, but it will be archived. Usually they post the archived version on You Tube, etc., within a day or so.

Is this it? 5 hours?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CzzCW2t-k-g&pp=0gcJCdQJAYcqIYzv

Yes. They got it posted very quickly.

I went through it quickly so maybe I missed it, but I didn't really hear much mention of the new school being factored into the existing boundary study.

You didn't miss anything. There were a few passing references to needing to take a new western HS into account (it's also mentioned at p. 25 of the deck available at https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DHQSCB71FE2F/$file/New%20DRAFT%206_17%20Work%20Session%20-%20FCPS%20Boundary%20Review%20Presentation_v2.pdf) but there was no substantive discussion.

[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:This is needed! We can’t really be free until we have the freedom to choose our education options just as anything else!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know why you guys are going on about all of this?! Dems are always excited about new projects until they drop the ball. Wait till school choice becomes a thing in this area - I hope Trump will at least get that done before his time is up.

You do understand that school choice is a state issue and not a national issue? The Federal Government doesn't have a say on school choice.

Will be a Federal issue once this bill is signed into law - https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/833/text

Haha and schools will be free to reject you.

DP, sure the schools can reject whoever they want, but the flip side is that they can accept whoever they want, and they don’t need to justify anything to you.

Again for those in the back, at some point FCPS has to decide if it wants UMC kids in the school system or not. If they do, they’re going to have to change the way they disregard these families.

The consistent problem is poor facilities planning and random decisions that come out of the blue with inadequate notice.

You get an addition, someone else gets told there's no money. You get told to expect boundary changes after boundary changes, someone else gets a new school that no one was expecting. You could be an UMC family that benefits or an UMC family that gets screwed.

But there's no real transparency or consistency, and all their BS about doing a "holistic" review isn't changing any of that.

UMC families can typically afford private, so FCPS is competing against those schools for these UMC students. I have consistently heard stability and predictability in school pyramids matter to this cohort, but the threat of boundary changes has the effect of doing the opposite.

Long term, UMC families will continue to migrate to private schools (we’re talking about potentially making the move for our kids). I know others who have already made the switch.

Agree. We've got Sandy Anderson at the work session today urging Dr. Reid to discount the views of parents who actually organize to make their voices heard. The hostility is very real, and it's not lost on people.

Are the work sessions available to watch?

Yes, today's work session just concluded, but it will be archived. Usually they post the archived version on You Tube, etc., within a day or so.

Is this it? 5 hours?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CzzCW2t-k-g&pp=0gcJCdQJAYcqIYzv

Yes. They got it posted very quickly.

I went through it quickly so maybe I missed it, but I didn't really hear much mention of the new school being factored into the existing boundary study.

You didn't miss anything. There were a few passing references to needing to take a new western HS into account (it's also mentioned at p. 25 of the deck available at https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DHQSCB71FE2F/$file/New%20DRAFT%206_17%20Work%20Session%20-%20FCPS%20Boundary%20Review%20Presentation_v2.pdf) but there was no substantive discussion.

There was an Agenda posted that indicated a motion from a Closed Meeting that indicated a vote on a purchase that I assume is the KAA facility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We live nearby. KAA does nothing for the surrounding community. Their teens don't volunteer at our rec league, I never see them out doing food drives or anything. They charge fees to use their fields.

this is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am going to be so pissed if some political operative from a community totally unaffected by this new school finds a way to derail this purchase. I have the feeling this is already in the works - it's like we're back in 2021 with Rory Cooper pulling all the strings.

Yup.

Three board members didn’t vote for the purchase: At-Large Representative Ilryong Moon, Rachna Sizemore Heizer (Braddock District) and Melanie Meren (Hunter Mill). I live in Hunter Mill district and I am not going to vote for Moon and Meren next time.

And then there’s the Great Falls group, which seems to oppose anything that remotely threatens their school boundary.

Watch out!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

+1 The people affected by the purchase have waited for this a long time. There were other actors vying for the property. Of course, they jumped on it. This area has had many boundary adjustments through the years and understand the disruption. THRU had some major disturbing changes proposed. This is because there is only one high school in close proximity and the School Board thinks there are too many students there. There are neighborhoods who have been switched high schools three times in recent history. And, another switch is proposed.

This is an opportunity for a true community high school.

Amen.

20171 Hendon/Oak Hill area may finally have its own high school. This is a great news.

I have been critical of FCPS, but this is a job well done. (and I cannot believe Melen and Moon didn’t vote for this)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to be so pissed if some political operative from a community totally unaffected by this new school finds a way to derail this purchase. I have the feeling this is already in the works - it's like we're back in 2021 with Rory Cooper pulling all the strings.

Yup.

Three board members didn’t vote for the purchase: At-Large Representative Ilryong Moon, Rachna Sizemore Heizer (Braddock District) and Melanie Meren (Hunter Mill). I live in Hunter Mill district and I am not going to vote for Moon and Meren next time.

And then there’s the Great Falls group, which seems to oppose anything that remotely threatens their school boundary.

Watch out!

Vanessa has entered the chat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 The people affected by the purchase have waited for this a long time. There were other actors vying for the property. Of course, they jumped on it. This area has had many boundary adjustments through the years and understand the disruption. THRU had some major disturbing changes proposed. This is because there is only one high school in close proximity and the School Board thinks there are too many students there. There are neighborhoods who have been switched high schools three times in recent history. And, another switch is proposed.

This is an opportunity for a true community high school.

Amen.

20171 Hendon/Oak Hill area may finally have its own high school. This is a great news.

I have been critical of FCPS, but this is a job well done. (and I cannot believe Melen and Moon didn’t vote for this)

According to work session agenda, they discussed it in closed meeting today. Three were not there: Dunne, Dixit, and Frisch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to be so pissed if some political operative from a community totally unaffected by this new school finds a way to derail this purchase. I have the feeling this is already in the works - it's like we're back in 2021 with Rory Cooper pulling all the strings.

Yup.

Three board members didn’t vote for the purchase: At-Large Representative Ilryong Moon, Rachna Sizemore Heizer (Braddock District) and Melanie Meren (Hunter Mill). I live in Hunter Mill district and I am not going to vote for Moon and Meren next time.

And then there’s the Great Falls group, which seems to oppose anything that remotely threatens their school boundary.

Watch out!

Vanessa has entered the chat.

She doesn't live in Hunter Mill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to be so pissed if some political operative from a community totally unaffected by this new school finds a way to derail this purchase. I have the feeling this is already in the works - it's like we're back in 2021 with Rory Cooper pulling all the strings.

Yup.

Three board members didn’t vote for the purchase: At-Large Representative Ilryong Moon, Rachna Sizemore Heizer (Braddock District) and Melanie Meren (Hunter Mill). I live in Hunter Mill district and I am not going to vote for Moon and Meren next time.

And then there’s the Great Falls group, which seems to oppose anything that remotely threatens their school boundary.

Watch out!

Vanessa has entered the chat.

She doesn't live in Hunter Mill.

DP. That's true, but then the poster who claimed to live in Hunter Mill probably doesn't live there, either.

[Anonymous]

I’m concerned they will make this a magnet school or something that won’t really help with capacity issues in the area. One of the board members floated that idea in an article (from WTOP?). That article also mentioned getting community input. Who knows what that will mean. Everyone is going to have their pet agenda, ugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to be so pissed if some political operative from a community totally unaffected by this new school finds a way to derail this purchase. I have the feeling this is already in the works - it's like we're back in 2021 with Rory Cooper pulling all the strings.

Yup.

Three board members didn’t vote for the purchase: At-Large Representative Ilryong Moon, Rachna Sizemore Heizer (Braddock District) and Melanie Meren (Hunter Mill). I live in Hunter Mill district and I am not going to vote for Moon and Meren next time.

And then there’s the Great Falls group, which seems to oppose anything that remotely threatens their school boundary.

Watch out!

Vanessa has entered the chat.

She doesn't live in Hunter Mill.

DP. That's true, but then the poster who claimed to live in Hunter Mill probably doesn't live there, either.

Just checked the map. Does anyone have a link to a magisterial map that includes roads? Hard to tell on the maps I found.
Many Hunter Mill parents likely want this KAA school. Meren might be concerned about South Lakes losing kids, but she could really tick off the ones that could be assigned there. Some Dranesville kids would likely be assigned there, as well. They are currently at Westfield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m concerned they will make this a magnet school or something that won’t really help with capacity issues in the area. One of the board members floated that idea in an article (from WTOP?). That article also mentioned getting community input. Who knows what that will mean. Everyone is going to have their pet agenda, ugh.

Gee. Thanks for that. I googled it. It was Mateo Dunne.
https://wtop.com/fairfax-county/2025/06/fairfax-co-plans-to-buy-closing-private-school-with-eye-on-opening-first-new-high-school-in-decades/

That would be a terrible idea. We need relief from long commutes.