Boundary logic?

[Anonymous]

The Supreme Court has ruled that children can attend public school regardless of whether they reside in the US legally. How then can counties require students to legally reside within a school boundary in order to attend a particular school.

If national boundaries aren't being enforced, why are individual school boundaries?

Following the logic that students who show up have to be educated, if I drop my kid off at Langley rather than Mt. Vernon, they should be able to attend.

FCPS is packing the poorer schools with immigrants while other schools get none.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court has ruled that children can attend public school regardless of whether they reside in the US legally. How then can counties require students to legally reside within a school boundary in order to attend a particular school.

If national boundaries aren't being enforced, why are individual school boundaries?

Following the logic that students who show up have to be educated, if I drop my kid off at Langley rather than Mt. Vernon, they should be able to attend.

FCPS is packing the poorer schools with immigrants while other schools get none.

That is an interesting argument that has some valid points, in my opinion.

However, I think that residency is what determines the ruling. And, I guess, residency can be illegal, but still be residency.....?

The ruling was based on the fact that all kids should be educated. I think if you wanted to make a case of this, it would be interesting.

Thinking back to when Darrell Green got in trouble for renting/purchasing a condo in Oakton for his son to attend Oakton--when they actually lived in Loudoun. Maybe, the kid was not sleeping in Oakton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court has ruled that children can attend public school regardless of whether they reside in the US legally. How then can counties require students to legally reside within a school boundary in order to attend a particular school.

If national boundaries aren't being enforced, why are individual school boundaries?

Following the logic that students who show up have to be educated, if I drop my kid off at Langley rather than Mt. Vernon, they should be able to attend.

FCPS is packing the poorer schools with immigrants while other schools get none.

You really shouldn't dabble in arguments that rely on logic. Emotion is more your speed.

[Anonymous]

> Maybe, the kid was not sleeping in Oakton.

Yes, that's correct. FCPS says where the kid sleeps each night will determine it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: > Maybe, the kid was not sleeping in Oakton.

Yes, that's correct. FCPS says where the kid sleeps each night will determine it.

So the County places shelters, subsidized housing, and apartments in certain parts of the county while other areas remain high-income, single-family only. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: > Maybe, the kid was not sleeping in Oakton.

Yes, that's correct. FCPS says where the kid sleeps each night will determine it.

So the County places shelters, subsidized housing, and apartments in certain parts of the county while other areas remain high-income, single-family only. Got it.

Which schools have no low-income within their boundaries? We live in a well-off school boundary, and we still have several low-income apartment complexes within the school boundaries at all three school levels.

Unless you're talking about McLean HS (boundary map: http://virginia.hometownlocator.com/schools/profiles,n,mclean%20high,z,22101,t,pb,i,1118971.cfm) where they somehow managed to cut out all of Pimmit Hills but still pick up the swath of Falls Church between 29 and 7 and another chunk near Arlington? I think they're an outlier. Most other schools have contiguous boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: > Maybe, the kid was not sleeping in Oakton.

Yes, that's correct. FCPS says where the kid sleeps each night will determine it.

So the County places shelters, subsidized housing, and apartments in certain parts of the county while other areas remain high-income, single-family only. Got it.

Which schools have no low-income within their boundaries? We live in a well-off school boundary, and we still have several low-income apartment complexes within the school boundaries at all three school levels.

Unless you're talking about McLean HS (boundary map: http://virginia.hometownlocator.com/schools/profiles,n,mclean%20high,z,22101,t,pb,i,1118971.cfm) where they somehow managed to cut out all of Pimmit Hills but still pick up the swath of Falls Church between 29 and 7 and another chunk near Arlington? I think they're an outlier. Most other schools have contiguous boundaries.

Rather than using "none" as in zero, I should have said "very few". The county is not sharing the burden of new immigrants equally throughout the county.

[Anonymous]

That is correct and it happens all the time through re-zonings but the public doesn't seem to follow it. One year the County was determining new locations for those with mental issues. Do you think they proposed any in Mclean? Mclean has a powerful citizens association to combat development in their neighborhood that very few other neighborhoods can rival.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court has ruled that children can attend public school regardless of whether they reside in the US legally. How then can counties require students to legally reside within a school boundary in order to attend a particular school.

If national boundaries aren't being enforced, why are individual school boundaries?

Following the logic that students who show up have to be educated, if I drop my kid off at Langley rather than Mt. Vernon, they should be able to attend.

FCPS is packing the poorer schools with immigrants while other schools get none.

You really shouldn't dabble in arguments that rely on logic. Emotion is more your speed.

Yes, I'm expressing emotion (anger, frustration, annoyance) that some schools are bearing a disproportionate share of the burden of educating illegal immigrant students.

FCPS has a "policy" that students are educated where they sleep, but is that codified into law? Can someone cite the Code?

[Anonymous]

Op, the immigrants and poor people are making the schools poor, not the other way around. My grandmother went to McKinley Tech like 90 years ago when it was brand new and a good school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: > Maybe, the kid was not sleeping in Oakton.

Yes, that's correct. FCPS says where the kid sleeps each night will determine it.

So the County places shelters, subsidized housing, and apartments in certain parts of the county while other areas remain high-income, single-family only. Got it.

The county finds less expensive options to make the money it has go as far as it can.

[Anonymous]

A lot of the immigrants are living multifamily, inexpensive apts that have nothing to do with the county subsidies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court has ruled that children can attend public school regardless of whether they reside in the US legally. How then can counties require students to legally reside within a school boundary in order to attend a particular school.

If national boundaries aren't being enforced, why are individual school boundaries?

Following the logic that students who show up have to be educated, if I drop my kid off at Langley rather than Mt. Vernon, they should be able to attend.

FCPS is packing the poorer schools with immigrants while other schools get none.

It is not intentional if that is what you are asking. Wealth and poverty tend to clump together.

Plus county services are determined by the county government and school districts are decided by the school board. They are separate entities with little overlap (social services in the schools is where the overlap occurs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: > Maybe, the kid was not sleeping in Oakton.

Yes, that's correct. FCPS says where the kid sleeps each night will determine it.

So the County places shelters, subsidized housing, and apartments in certain parts of the county while other areas remain high-income, single-family only. Got it.

Which schools have no low-income within their boundaries? We live in a well-off school boundary, and we still have several low-income apartment complexes within the school boundaries at all three school levels.

Unless you're talking about McLean HS (boundary map: http://virginia.hometownlocator.com/schools/profiles,n,mclean%20high,z,22101,t,pb,i,1118971.cfm) where they somehow managed to cut out all of Pimmit Hills but still pick up the swath of Falls Church between 29 and 7 and another chunk near Arlington? I think they're an outlier. Most other schools have contiguous boundaries.

The percentage of low-income students at McLean would go down if Pimmit Hills went there and the Timber Lane area went to Marshall, which is closer, or stayed at Falls Church, where it was zoned until the mid-80s. This is a rare example of a good attempt by FCPS to add some SES diversity to a school by gerrymandering the boundaries a little bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: > This is a rare example of a good attempt by FCPS to add some SES diversity to a school by gerrymandering the boundaries a little bit.

Rare indeed. I'm still amazed how basically all of Fairfax county north of Rt 7 goes to Langley, even the folks who live on the Loudoun border. Wouldn't it make more sense for all those in the western half go to Herndon? (I know it will never happen) .