FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sandy Anderson should literally be muzzled at this point. She is a walking legal liability for FCPS.

This is what happens when you elect really stupid, chatty idiots with no brains and even less filter to public office.

This is not helpful.

It is, however, the reality.

This entire process was structured so that the School Board could try to get past the perception that individual School Board members were initiating decisions about boundaries or unilaterally making decisions about boundaries for schools within their district.

Instead, the idea was to have the Superintendent work with third-party consultants to develop recommendations and solicit community feedback before they were presented to the Board, at which time the Board could weigh in.

Meeting were closed, and information not made available, to the public based on the assertion that the consultant and the advisory commitee were advising Reid, not the School Board. Decisions were made that "proposals" could be released without prior meetings in the affected pyramids, as otherwise required under SB policy, because they were merely a consultant's proposals and not the Board's.

And then you have stupid, chatty Sandy Anderson coming along and acting as the consultant is not doing what SHE wants and that she's going to make sure they align with HER priorities. It's exactly what this process was NOT supposed to be about.

She needs to step back and shut up for a while, and the sooner somewhat tells her about the legal risk she is creating and the turmoil she is generating, the better.

I don't know anything about Anderson, but I have seen this School Board -and other FCPS School Boards in action. They will have the final decision and it will be what they want. Reid and Thru will give them an "out" if it suits their agenda. If not, they will do what they want and say that they are listening to community feedback--whether it is what the community wants or not. There may also be some backroom deals with other members when different SB districts are involved. This is far from over.

Of course, but for this process to have any integrity you can't have Anderson free-range blabbing right now. All she is doing is creating confusion and undermining Reid. They are losing some staff over this crap already and she's not helpful at all.

The members with some brains are trying to maintain some distance from Thru's proposals, not claiming they aren't consistent with what Thru was supposed to have done or what they personally want.

But Reid said the same thing as Anderson about the Hunt Valley spilt feeder.

That adds a lot more validity to the statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sandy Anderson should literally be muzzled at this point. She is a walking legal liability for FCPS.

This is what happens when you elect really stupid, chatty idiots with no brains and even less filter to public office.

This is not helpful.

It is, however, the reality.

This entire process was structured so that the School Board could try to get past the perception that individual School Board members were initiating decisions about boundaries or unilaterally making decisions about boundaries for schools within their district.

Instead, the idea was to have the Superintendent work with third-party consultants to develop recommendations and solicit community feedback before they were presented to the Board, at which time the Board could weigh in.

Meeting were closed, and information not made available, to the public based on the assertion that the consultant and the advisory commitee were advising Reid, not the School Board. Decisions were made that "proposals" could be released without prior meetings in the affected pyramids, as otherwise required under SB policy, because they were merely a consultant's proposals and not the Board's.

And then you have stupid, chatty Sandy Anderson coming along and acting as the consultant is not doing what SHE wants and that she's going to make sure they align with HER priorities. It's exactly what this process was NOT supposed to be about.

She needs to step back and shut up for a while, and the sooner somewhat tells her about the legal risk she is creating and the turmoil she is generating, the better.

I don't know anything about Anderson, but I have seen this School Board -and other FCPS School Boards in action. They will have the final decision and it will be what they want. Reid and Thru will give them an "out" if it suits their agenda. If not, they will do what they want and say that they are listening to community feedback--whether it is what the community wants or not. There may also be some backroom deals with other members when different SB districts are involved. This is far from over.

Of course, but for this process to have any integrity you can't have Anderson free-range blabbing right now. All she is doing is creating confusion and undermining Reid. They are losing some staff over this crap already and she's not helpful at all.

The members with some brains are trying to maintain some distance from Thru's proposals, not claiming they aren't consistent with what Thru was supposed to have done or what they personally want.

But Reid said the same thing as Anderson about the Hunt Valley spilt feeder.

That adds a lot more validity to the statement.

Reid also said a few months these boundary changes would be "transformational" for FCPS so I'm not inclined to put much stock in what she has to say. I wonder if she'll even make it through the fall. At least one senior person who'd be important to implementing boundary changes has already given notice.

[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:

In truth, it is much easier to post links to meetings through already existing email pathways and websites than it is to create those pathways in communities that have no HOA. In a non-HOA Community that would involve door knocking, social media posting across multiple sites, getting personal contact information etc just to get to the point where a community has an email list. I understand people’s defensiveness in me pointing that out, but it isn’t “rude” to say so. It is the truth. Saying things like “we encourage all communities to participate” when many can’t organize as easily as you do is disingenuous.

I've been watching this thread because I went through this with my kids. I do live in tract housing with an HOA. Our HOA was not involved at all. However, our PTA parents became seriously engaged and formed groups to fight a change.

However, at that time, they were not taking elementary neighborhoods and splitting them as they are now. That hits closer to home. Anyone who cannot see that either has an agenda or has never had children.
I don't blame anyone who wants to keep the status quo.

Anyone who does not want to keep the status quo is likely someone who has no attachment to their current community and school.

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

Sandy Anderson stated at 2 public meetings this past week that she intends to move Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis families out of Lewis/Key and into Irving/WSHS.

So Lewis will lose around a couple dozen students

* Thru has Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis neighborhoods staying put for middle and high school, moving their split feeder to Saratoga Elementary, which is exactly the same distance from that neighborhood as Rolling Valley, eliminating the Rolling Valley split feeder and keeping all those students together through high school.

Thru's map shows 106 RV zoned Lewis students, around 15-16 per grade, so not a small number of students. Over 4 grades, that is at least 60 students potentially moving to WSHS, more once the neighborhood becomes WSHS.

Sandy Anderson says it is only 10 students per grade, which doesn't match with Thru's numbers.

Something is wrong with their numbers.

wow, really interesting. I thought Anderson's whole goal was to move more families to Lewis, not move them out of Lewis into the already over-crowded (according to her) West Springfield. Sometime back around 2015, probably when Daventry got moved, those RV families really tried to get rezoned to Irving/WS and couldn't make it happen. Geographically, they are one of the few places where it does make sense to just switch the elementary and leave them at Key/Lewis. I don't get why Anderson would support them moving to WSHS.
Rolling Valley doesn't need to lose students, though. I think they'd be at about 76% capacity if those kids go to Saratoga. And the "program capacity", which looks on the high side for RVES, is because they have a large special ed and autism program and those kids utilize a lot of space. The general grade classrooms are really dwindling. Many of the grades only have two classrooms. Even losing 10-16 kids per grade would really reduced enrollment of the core classroom grades.

Her goal seems to be move HV out of WSHS. Not sure how seeing as that is too many kids for SC schools. And she indicated Lewis is just a rumor but do we trust any of them?

They can move kids out of HV to SC, but it would create a split feeder out of HV as SCMS/HS can’t accommodate an entire new feeder elementary. Especially not one as large as HV. Also the only way to do it that wouldn’t be a lopsided split feeder would be to send almost everyone south of the parkway to SC and that’s kind of a big ask.

Also Thru’s proposals no longer have the Hagel Circle attendance island at Hayfield, so although that area is higher on the elementary students than middle/high, it does keep more students at South County than the school board’s maps had in their presentations. Something to keep in mind unless the SB’s maps are adopted in the end.

Exactly. She said the maps were a mistake and HV is supposed to move as a school so where does she propose they all go if they don’t do a split feeder?

Lewis. It’s coming.

But it was never even put forth as a proposal in any of the maps. Not from the SB/BRAC in the meeting PDFs, not from Thru in their maps. It has just never materialized as a possibility. I mean … they could technically spring anything on us at any time, but some/all of HVES to Lewis at this point would be a massive change out of left field.

I agree, but something is supposed to happen to the Hunt Valley in its entirety.

When asked publicly about the proposed Hunt Valley split feeder this past week, both Dr. Reid and Sandy Anderson stated that the Hunt Valley split feeder was not supposed to happen, it was a mistake, and Hunt Valley is supposed to move together. I also heard the they said something similar to the BRAC committee, that there were mistakes in this latest map, proposing split feeders that were not supposed to be on it, of schools that were supposed to move together.

If the school board has no advance knowlege of any of the rezoning plans, then how can they publicly claim that a school, in this case Hunt Valley but perhaps others from different parts of the county, is a "mistake" and is supposed to move as one unit?

I don’t trust or believe anything that most of the SB members are saying about the process at this point. They seem completely uninterested in it almost? Like, to the point of not even knowing what has been proposed so far and being surprised that the community members are looking at things so closely. Only Dunne has seemed on top of things as far as the boundary changes go. Basically what I’m saying is Anderson sounds like she has zero clue what’s going on and is not a reliable source.

The board members have had to deal with a lot of grief from this process and most are frankly sick of it. I’ve heard that Sandy Anderson has burned a lot of capital with her antics and the school board isn’t particularly inclined to go along with her future suggestions on any boundary moves beyond what is currently in the maps.

So she’s just talking out her ass about the RV split feeder staying at RV and then getting into Irving/WS? I thought the RV split staying as it is (RV, Key, Lewis) was on one of Thru’s scenario maps, but I don’t recall seeing RV/irving/WS no split feeder on any map … but she’s out here saying it … but are all the other SB members out there like “ok Sandy let’s get you to bed?” 🤔😂

Thru's proposals have Rolling Valley kids who already go to RV/Key/Lewis moving to Saratoga/Key/Lewis on the second scenario "split feeder" adjustments. There is no Thru scenario where the RV/Key/Lewis kids switch to RV/Irving/WSHS. Apparently this is a Sandy Anderson thing that she said at PTA meetings at both WSHS and Rolling Valley in the last month. I would think the RV parents would like the Sandy Anderson version better than the Thru version, but I personally think Thru's version makes more sense. Though it also leaves Rolling Valley pretty empty.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

In truth, it is much easier to post links to meetings through already existing email pathways and websites than it is to create those pathways in communities that have no HOA. In a non-HOA Community that would involve door knocking, social media posting across multiple sites, getting personal contact information etc just to get to the point where a community has an email list. I understand people’s defensiveness in me pointing that out, but it isn’t “rude” to say so. It is the truth. Saying things like “we encourage all communities to participate” when many can’t organize as easily as you do is disingenuous.

I've been watching this thread because I went through this with my kids. I do live in tract housing with an HOA. Our HOA was not involved at all. However, our PTA parents became seriously engaged and formed groups to fight a change.

However, at that time, they were not taking elementary neighborhoods and splitting them as they are now. That hits closer to home. Anyone who cannot see that either has an agenda or has never had children.
I don't blame anyone who wants to keep the status quo.

Anyone who does not want to keep the status quo is likely someone who has no attachment to their current community and school.

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

Sandy Anderson stated at 2 public meetings this past week that she intends to move Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis families out of Lewis/Key and into Irving/WSHS.

So Lewis will lose around a couple dozen students

* Thru has Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis neighborhoods staying put for middle and high school, moving their split feeder to Saratoga Elementary, which is exactly the same distance from that neighborhood as Rolling Valley, eliminating the Rolling Valley split feeder and keeping all those students together through high school.

Thru's map shows 106 RV zoned Lewis students, around 15-16 per grade, so not a small number of students. Over 4 grades, that is at least 60 students potentially moving to WSHS, more once the neighborhood becomes WSHS.

Sandy Anderson says it is only 10 students per grade, which doesn't match with Thru's numbers.

Something is wrong with their numbers.

wow, really interesting. I thought Anderson's whole goal was to move more families to Lewis, not move them out of Lewis into the already over-crowded (according to her) West Springfield. Sometime back around 2015, probably when Daventry got moved, those RV families really tried to get rezoned to Irving/WS and couldn't make it happen. Geographically, they are one of the few places where it does make sense to just switch the elementary and leave them at Key/Lewis. I don't get why Anderson would support them moving to WSHS.
Rolling Valley doesn't need to lose students, though. I think they'd be at about 76% capacity if those kids go to Saratoga. And the "program capacity", which looks on the high side for RVES, is because they have a large special ed and autism program and those kids utilize a lot of space. The general grade classrooms are really dwindling. Many of the grades only have two classrooms. Even losing 10-16 kids per grade would really reduced enrollment of the core classroom grades.

Her goal seems to be move HV out of WSHS. Not sure how seeing as that is too many kids for SC schools. And she indicated Lewis is just a rumor but do we trust any of them?

They can move kids out of HV to SC, but it would create a split feeder out of HV as SCMS/HS can’t accommodate an entire new feeder elementary. Especially not one as large as HV. Also the only way to do it that wouldn’t be a lopsided split feeder would be to send almost everyone south of the parkway to SC and that’s kind of a big ask.

Also Thru’s proposals no longer have the Hagel Circle attendance island at Hayfield, so although that area is higher on the elementary students than middle/high, it does keep more students at South County than the school board’s maps had in their presentations. Something to keep in mind unless the SB’s maps are adopted in the end.

Exactly. She said the maps were a mistake and HV is supposed to move as a school so where does she propose they all go if they don’t do a split feeder?

Lewis. It’s coming.

But it was never even put forth as a proposal in any of the maps. Not from the SB/BRAC in the meeting PDFs, not from Thru in their maps. It has just never materialized as a possibility. I mean … they could technically spring anything on us at any time, but some/all of HVES to Lewis at this point would be a massive change out of left field.

I agree, but something is supposed to happen to the Hunt Valley in its entirety.

When asked publicly about the proposed Hunt Valley split feeder this past week, both Dr. Reid and Sandy Anderson stated that the Hunt Valley split feeder was not supposed to happen, it was a mistake, and Hunt Valley is supposed to move together. I also heard the they said something similar to the BRAC committee, that there were mistakes in this latest map, proposing split feeders that were not supposed to be on it, of schools that were supposed to move together.

If the school board has no advance knowlege of any of the rezoning plans, then how can they publicly claim that a school, in this case Hunt Valley but perhaps others from different parts of the county, is a "mistake" and is supposed to move as one unit?

I don’t trust or believe anything that most of the SB members are saying about the process at this point. They seem completely uninterested in it almost? Like, to the point of not even knowing what has been proposed so far and being surprised that the community members are looking at things so closely. Only Dunne has seemed on top of things as far as the boundary changes go. Basically what I’m saying is Anderson sounds like she has zero clue what’s going on and is not a reliable source.

The board members have had to deal with a lot of grief from this process and most are frankly sick of it. I’ve heard that Sandy Anderson has burned a lot of capital with her antics and the school board isn’t particularly inclined to go along with her future suggestions on any boundary moves beyond what is currently in the maps.

So she’s just talking out her ass about the RV split feeder staying at RV and then getting into Irving/WS? I thought the RV split staying as it is (RV, Key, Lewis) was on one of Thru’s scenario maps, but I don’t recall seeing RV/irving/WS no split feeder on any map … but she’s out here saying it … but are all the other SB members out there like “ok Sandy let’s get you to bed?” 🤔😂

Thru's proposals have Rolling Valley kids who already go to RV/Key/Lewis moving to Saratoga/Key/Lewis on the second scenario "split feeder" adjustments. There is no Thru scenario where the RV/Key/Lewis kids switch to RV/Irving/WSHS. Apparently this is a Sandy Anderson thing that she said at PTA meetings at both WSHS and Rolling Valley in the last month. I would think the RV parents would like the Sandy Anderson version better than the Thru version, but I personally think Thru's version makes more sense. Though it also leaves Rolling Valley pretty empty.

Yes, at the meeting she said it wasn’t fair and they would bring those RV kids to WSHS. McDaniel was also at the meeting but he didn’t say much. I think they’re going to take HV south of the parkway and move them to Newington Forest ES and then move a bunch of current NF kids out. I don’t know where there is space for them tho.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In truth, it is much easier to post links to meetings through already existing email pathways and websites than it is to create those pathways in communities that have no HOA. In a non-HOA Community that would involve door knocking, social media posting across multiple sites, getting personal contact information etc just to get to the point where a community has an email list. I understand people’s defensiveness in me pointing that out, but it isn’t “rude” to say so. It is the truth. Saying things like “we encourage all communities to participate” when many can’t organize as easily as you do is disingenuous.

I've been watching this thread because I went through this with my kids. I do live in tract housing with an HOA. Our HOA was not involved at all. However, our PTA parents became seriously engaged and formed groups to fight a change.

However, at that time, they were not taking elementary neighborhoods and splitting them as they are now. That hits closer to home. Anyone who cannot see that either has an agenda or has never had children.
I don't blame anyone who wants to keep the status quo.

Anyone who does not want to keep the status quo is likely someone who has no attachment to their current community and school.

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

Sandy Anderson stated at 2 public meetings this past week that she intends to move Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis families out of Lewis/Key and into Irving/WSHS.

So Lewis will lose around a couple dozen students

* Thru has Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis neighborhoods staying put for middle and high school, moving their split feeder to Saratoga Elementary, which is exactly the same distance from that neighborhood as Rolling Valley, eliminating the Rolling Valley split feeder and keeping all those students together through high school.

Thru's map shows 106 RV zoned Lewis students, around 15-16 per grade, so not a small number of students. Over 4 grades, that is at least 60 students potentially moving to WSHS, more once the neighborhood becomes WSHS.

Sandy Anderson says it is only 10 students per grade, which doesn't match with Thru's numbers.

Something is wrong with their numbers.

wow, really interesting. I thought Anderson's whole goal was to move more families to Lewis, not move them out of Lewis into the already over-crowded (according to her) West Springfield. Sometime back around 2015, probably when Daventry got moved, those RV families really tried to get rezoned to Irving/WS and couldn't make it happen. Geographically, they are one of the few places where it does make sense to just switch the elementary and leave them at Key/Lewis. I don't get why Anderson would support them moving to WSHS.
Rolling Valley doesn't need to lose students, though. I think they'd be at about 76% capacity if those kids go to Saratoga. And the "program capacity", which looks on the high side for RVES, is because they have a large special ed and autism program and those kids utilize a lot of space. The general grade classrooms are really dwindling. Many of the grades only have two classrooms. Even losing 10-16 kids per grade would really reduced enrollment of the core classroom grades.

Her goal seems to be move HV out of WSHS. Not sure how seeing as that is too many kids for SC schools. And she indicated Lewis is just a rumor but do we trust any of them?

They can move kids out of HV to SC, but it would create a split feeder out of HV as SCMS/HS can’t accommodate an entire new feeder elementary. Especially not one as large as HV. Also the only way to do it that wouldn’t be a lopsided split feeder would be to send almost everyone south of the parkway to SC and that’s kind of a big ask.

Also Thru’s proposals no longer have the Hagel Circle attendance island at Hayfield, so although that area is higher on the elementary students than middle/high, it does keep more students at South County than the school board’s maps had in their presentations. Something to keep in mind unless the SB’s maps are adopted in the end.

Exactly. She said the maps were a mistake and HV is supposed to move as a school so where does she propose they all go if they don’t do a split feeder?

Lewis. It’s coming.

But it was never even put forth as a proposal in any of the maps. Not from the SB/BRAC in the meeting PDFs, not from Thru in their maps. It has just never materialized as a possibility. I mean … they could technically spring anything on us at any time, but some/all of HVES to Lewis at this point would be a massive change out of left field.

I agree, but something is supposed to happen to the Hunt Valley in its entirety.

When asked publicly about the proposed Hunt Valley split feeder this past week, both Dr. Reid and Sandy Anderson stated that the Hunt Valley split feeder was not supposed to happen, it was a mistake, and Hunt Valley is supposed to move together. I also heard the they said something similar to the BRAC committee, that there were mistakes in this latest map, proposing split feeders that were not supposed to be on it, of schools that were supposed to move together.

If the school board has no advance knowlege of any of the rezoning plans, then how can they publicly claim that a school, in this case Hunt Valley but perhaps others from different parts of the county, is a "mistake" and is supposed to move as one unit?

I don’t trust or believe anything that most of the SB members are saying about the process at this point. They seem completely uninterested in it almost? Like, to the point of not even knowing what has been proposed so far and being surprised that the community members are looking at things so closely. Only Dunne has seemed on top of things as far as the boundary changes go. Basically what I’m saying is Anderson sounds like she has zero clue what’s going on and is not a reliable source.

The board members have had to deal with a lot of grief from this process and most are frankly sick of it. I’ve heard that Sandy Anderson has burned a lot of capital with her antics and the school board isn’t particularly inclined to go along with her future suggestions on any boundary moves beyond what is currently in the maps.

So she’s just talking out her ass about the RV split feeder staying at RV and then getting into Irving/WS? I thought the RV split staying as it is (RV, Key, Lewis) was on one of Thru’s scenario maps, but I don’t recall seeing RV/irving/WS no split feeder on any map … but she’s out here saying it … but are all the other SB members out there like “ok Sandy let’s get you to bed?” 🤔😂

Thru's proposals have Rolling Valley kids who already go to RV/Key/Lewis moving to Saratoga/Key/Lewis on the second scenario "split feeder" adjustments. There is no Thru scenario where the RV/Key/Lewis kids switch to RV/Irving/WSHS. Apparently this is a Sandy Anderson thing that she said at PTA meetings at both WSHS and Rolling Valley in the last month. I would think the RV parents would like the Sandy Anderson version better than the Thru version, but I personally think Thru's version makes more sense. Though it also leaves Rolling Valley pretty empty.

Yes, at the meeting she said it wasn’t fair and they would bring those RV kids to WSHS. McDaniel was also at the meeting but he didn’t say much. I think they’re going to take HV south of the parkway and move them to Newington Forest ES and then move a bunch of current NF kids out. I don’t know where there is space for them tho.

Silverbrook?

Or Saratoga?

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]In truth, it is much easier to post links to meetings through already existing email pathways and websites than it is to create those pathways in communities that have no HOA. In a non-HOA Community that would involve door knocking, social media posting across multiple sites, getting personal contact information etc just to get to the point where a community has an email list. I understand people’s defensiveness in me pointing that out, but it isn’t “rude” to say so. It is the truth. Saying things like “we encourage all communities to participate” when many can’t organize as easily as you do is disingenuous.[/quote]

I've been watching this thread because I went through this with my kids. I do live in tract housing with an HOA. Our HOA was not involved at all. However, our PTA parents became seriously engaged and formed groups to fight a change.

However, at that time, they were not taking elementary neighborhoods and splitting them as they are now. That hits closer to home. Anyone who cannot see that either has an agenda or has never had children.
I don't blame anyone who wants to keep the status quo.

Anyone who does not want to keep the status quo is likely someone who has no attachment to their current community and school.[/quote]

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.[/quote]

Sandy Anderson stated at 2 public meetings this past week that she intends to move Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis families out of Lewis/Key and into Irving/WSHS.

So Lewis will lose around a couple dozen students

* Thru has Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis neighborhoods staying put for middle and high school, moving their split feeder to Saratoga Elementary, which is exactly the same distance from that neighborhood as Rolling Valley, eliminating the Rolling Valley split feeder and keeping all those students together through high school.

Thru's map shows 106 RV zoned Lewis students, around 15-16 per grade, so not a small number of students. Over 4 grades, that is at least 60 students potentially moving to WSHS, more once the neighborhood becomes WSHS.

Sandy Anderson says it is only 10 students per grade, which doesn't match with Thru's numbers.

Something is wrong with their numbers.[/quote]

wow, really interesting. I thought Anderson's whole goal was to move more families to Lewis, not move them out of Lewis into the already over-crowded (according to her) West Springfield. Sometime back around 2015, probably when Daventry got moved, those RV families really tried to get rezoned to Irving/WS and couldn't make it happen. Geographically, they are one of the few places where it does make sense to just switch the elementary and leave them at Key/Lewis. I don't get why Anderson would support them moving to WSHS.
Rolling Valley doesn't need to lose students, though. I think they'd be at about 76% capacity if those kids go to Saratoga. And the "program capacity", which looks on the high side for RVES, is because they have a large special ed and autism program and those kids utilize a lot of space. The general grade classrooms are really dwindling. Many of the grades only have two classrooms. Even losing 10-16 kids per grade would really reduced enrollment of the core classroom grades. [/quote]

Her goal seems to be move HV out of WSHS. Not sure how seeing as that is too many kids for SC schools. And she indicated Lewis is just a rumor but do we trust any of them?[/quote]

They can move kids out of HV to SC, but it would create a split feeder out of HV as SCMS/HS can’t accommodate an entire new feeder elementary. Especially not one as large as HV. Also the only way to do it that wouldn’t be a lopsided split feeder would be to send almost everyone south of the parkway to SC and that’s kind of a big ask.

Also Thru’s proposals no longer have the Hagel Circle attendance island at Hayfield, so although that area is higher on the elementary students than middle/high, it does keep more students at South County than the school board’s maps had in their presentations. Something to keep in mind unless the SB’s maps are adopted in the end. [/quote]

Exactly. She said the maps were a mistake and HV is supposed to move as a school so where does she propose they all go if they don’t do a split feeder?[/quote]
Lewis. It’s coming.[/quote]

But it was never even put forth as a proposal in any of the maps. Not from the SB/BRAC in the meeting PDFs, not from Thru in their maps. It has just never materialized as a possibility. I mean … they could technically spring anything on us at any time, but some/all of HVES to Lewis at this point would be a massive change out of left field. [/quote]

I agree, but [i]something[/i] is supposed to happen to the Hunt Valley in its entirety.

When asked publicly about the proposed Hunt Valley split feeder this past week, both Dr. Reid and Sandy Anderson stated that the Hunt Valley split feeder was not supposed to happen, it was a mistake, and Hunt Valley is supposed to move together. I also heard the they said something similar to the BRAC committee, that there were mistakes in this latest map, proposing split feeders that were not supposed to be on it, of schools that were supposed to move together.

If the school board has no advance knowlege of any of the rezoning plans, then how can they publicly claim that a school, in this case Hunt Valley but perhaps others from different parts of the county, is a "mistake" and is supposed to move as one unit?

[/quote]

I don’t trust or believe anything that most of the SB members are saying about the process at this point. They seem completely uninterested in it almost? Like, to the point of not even knowing what has been proposed so far and being surprised that the community members are looking at things so closely. Only Dunne has seemed on top of things as far as the boundary changes go. Basically what I’m saying is Anderson sounds like she has zero clue what’s going on and is not a reliable source. [/quote]

The board members have had to deal with a lot of grief from this process and most are frankly sick of it. I’ve heard that Sandy Anderson has burned a lot of capital with her antics and the school board isn’t particularly inclined to go along with her future suggestions on any boundary moves beyond what is currently in the maps.[/quote]

So she’s just talking out her ass about the RV split feeder staying at RV and then getting into Irving/WS? I thought the RV split staying as it is (RV, Key, Lewis) was on one of Thru’s scenario maps, but I don’t recall seeing RV/irving/WS no split feeder on any map … but she’s out here saying it … but are all the other SB members out there like “ok Sandy let’s get you to bed?” 🤔😂[/quote]

Thru's proposals have Rolling Valley kids who already go to RV/Key/Lewis moving to Saratoga/Key/Lewis on the second scenario "split feeder" adjustments. There is no Thru scenario where the RV/Key/Lewis kids switch to RV/Irving/WSHS. Apparently this is a Sandy Anderson thing that she said at PTA meetings at both WSHS and Rolling Valley in the last month. I would think the RV parents would like the Sandy Anderson version better than the Thru version, but I personally think Thru's version makes more sense. Though it also leaves Rolling Valley pretty empty.[/quote]

Yes, at the meeting she said it wasn’t fair and they would bring those RV kids to WSHS. McDaniel was also at the meeting but he didn’t say much. I think they’re going to take HV south of the parkway and move them to Newington Forest ES and then move a bunch of current NF kids out. I don’t know where there is space for them tho. [/quote]

There are Silverbrook kids getting moved to Sangster to replace the Sangster kids getting moved to Newington Forest. Maybe they will just create a 3 way and move Newington Forest kids to fill the spots of the Silverbrook kids getting rezoned to Sangster.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

In truth, it is much easier to post links to meetings through already existing email pathways and websites than it is to create those pathways in communities that have no HOA. In a non-HOA Community that would involve door knocking, social media posting across multiple sites, getting personal contact information etc just to get to the point where a community has an email list. I understand people’s defensiveness in me pointing that out, but it isn’t “rude” to say so. It is the truth. Saying things like “we encourage all communities to participate” when many can’t organize as easily as you do is disingenuous.

I've been watching this thread because I went through this with my kids. I do live in tract housing with an HOA. Our HOA was not involved at all. However, our PTA parents became seriously engaged and formed groups to fight a change.

However, at that time, they were not taking elementary neighborhoods and splitting them as they are now. That hits closer to home. Anyone who cannot see that either has an agenda or has never had children.
I don't blame anyone who wants to keep the status quo.

Anyone who does not want to keep the status quo is likely someone who has no attachment to their current community and school.

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

Sandy Anderson stated at 2 public meetings this past week that she intends to move Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis families out of Lewis/Key and into Irving/WSHS.

So Lewis will lose around a couple dozen students

* Thru has Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis neighborhoods staying put for middle and high school, moving their split feeder to Saratoga Elementary, which is exactly the same distance from that neighborhood as Rolling Valley, eliminating the Rolling Valley split feeder and keeping all those students together through high school.

Thru's map shows 106 RV zoned Lewis students, around 15-16 per grade, so not a small number of students. Over 4 grades, that is at least 60 students potentially moving to WSHS, more once the neighborhood becomes WSHS.

Sandy Anderson says it is only 10 students per grade, which doesn't match with Thru's numbers.

Something is wrong with their numbers.

wow, really interesting. I thought Anderson's whole goal was to move more families to Lewis, not move them out of Lewis into the already over-crowded (according to her) West Springfield. Sometime back around 2015, probably when Daventry got moved, those RV families really tried to get rezoned to Irving/WS and couldn't make it happen. Geographically, they are one of the few places where it does make sense to just switch the elementary and leave them at Key/Lewis. I don't get why Anderson would support them moving to WSHS.
Rolling Valley doesn't need to lose students, though. I think they'd be at about 76% capacity if those kids go to Saratoga. And the "program capacity", which looks on the high side for RVES, is because they have a large special ed and autism program and those kids utilize a lot of space. The general grade classrooms are really dwindling. Many of the grades only have two classrooms. Even losing 10-16 kids per grade would really reduced enrollment of the core classroom grades.

Her goal seems to be move HV out of WSHS. Not sure how seeing as that is too many kids for SC schools. And she indicated Lewis is just a rumor but do we trust any of them?

They can move kids out of HV to SC, but it would create a split feeder out of HV as SCMS/HS can’t accommodate an entire new feeder elementary. Especially not one as large as HV. Also the only way to do it that wouldn’t be a lopsided split feeder would be to send almost everyone south of the parkway to SC and that’s kind of a big ask.

Also Thru’s proposals no longer have the Hagel Circle attendance island at Hayfield, so although that area is higher on the elementary students than middle/high, it does keep more students at South County than the school board’s maps had in their presentations. Something to keep in mind unless the SB’s maps are adopted in the end.

Exactly. She said the maps were a mistake and HV is supposed to move as a school so where does she propose they all go if they don’t do a split feeder?

Lewis. It’s coming.

But it was never even put forth as a proposal in any of the maps. Not from the SB/BRAC in the meeting PDFs, not from Thru in their maps. It has just never materialized as a possibility. I mean … they could technically spring anything on us at any time, but some/all of HVES to Lewis at this point would be a massive change out of left field.

I agree, but something is supposed to happen to the Hunt Valley in its entirety.

When asked publicly about the proposed Hunt Valley split feeder this past week, both Dr. Reid and Sandy Anderson stated that the Hunt Valley split feeder was not supposed to happen, it was a mistake, and Hunt Valley is supposed to move together. I also heard the they said something similar to the BRAC committee, that there were mistakes in this latest map, proposing split feeders that were not supposed to be on it, of schools that were supposed to move together.

If the school board has no advance knowlege of any of the rezoning plans, then how can they publicly claim that a school, in this case Hunt Valley but perhaps others from different parts of the county, is a "mistake" and is supposed to move as one unit?

I don’t trust or believe anything that most of the SB members are saying about the process at this point. They seem completely uninterested in it almost? Like, to the point of not even knowing what has been proposed so far and being surprised that the community members are looking at things so closely. Only Dunne has seemed on top of things as far as the boundary changes go. Basically what I’m saying is Anderson sounds like she has zero clue what’s going on and is not a reliable source.

The board members have had to deal with a lot of grief from this process and most are frankly sick of it. I’ve heard that Sandy Anderson has burned a lot of capital with her antics and the school board isn’t particularly inclined to go along with her future suggestions on any boundary moves beyond what is currently in the maps.

So she’s just talking out her ass about the RV split feeder staying at RV and then getting into Irving/WS? I thought the RV split staying as it is (RV, Key, Lewis) was on one of Thru’s scenario maps, but I don’t recall seeing RV/irving/WS no split feeder on any map … but she’s out here saying it … but are all the other SB members out there like “ok Sandy let’s get you to bed?” 🤔😂

Thru's proposals have Rolling Valley kids who already go to RV/Key/Lewis moving to Saratoga/Key/Lewis on the second scenario "split feeder" adjustments. There is no Thru scenario where the RV/Key/Lewis kids switch to RV/Irving/WSHS. Apparently this is a Sandy Anderson thing that she said at PTA meetings at both WSHS and Rolling Valley in the last month. I would think the RV parents would like the Sandy Anderson version better than the Thru version, but I personally think Thru's version makes more sense. Though it also leaves Rolling Valley pretty empty.

They have plenty of proposals that take schools down to about 80% program capacity like Rolling Valley here.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]In truth, it is much easier to post links to meetings through already existing email pathways and websites than it is to create those pathways in communities that have no HOA. In a non-HOA Community that would involve door knocking, social media posting across multiple sites, getting personal contact information etc just to get to the point where a community has an email list. I understand people’s defensiveness in me pointing that out, but it isn’t “rude” to say so. It is the truth. Saying things like “we encourage all communities to participate” when many can’t organize as easily as you do is disingenuous.[/quote]

I've been watching this thread because I went through this with my kids. I do live in tract housing with an HOA. Our HOA was not involved at all. However, our PTA parents became seriously engaged and formed groups to fight a change.

However, at that time, they were not taking elementary neighborhoods and splitting them as they are now. That hits closer to home. Anyone who cannot see that either has an agenda or has never had children.
I don't blame anyone who wants to keep the status quo.

Anyone who does not want to keep the status quo is likely someone who has no attachment to their current community and school.[/quote]

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.[/quote]

Sandy Anderson stated at 2 public meetings this past week that she intends to move Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis families out of Lewis/Key and into Irving/WSHS.

So Lewis will lose around a couple dozen students

* Thru has Rolling Valley/Key/Lewis neighborhoods staying put for middle and high school, moving their split feeder to Saratoga Elementary, which is exactly the same distance from that neighborhood as Rolling Valley, eliminating the Rolling Valley split feeder and keeping all those students together through high school.

Thru's map shows 106 RV zoned Lewis students, around 15-16 per grade, so not a small number of students. Over 4 grades, that is at least 60 students potentially moving to WSHS, more once the neighborhood becomes WSHS.

Sandy Anderson says it is only 10 students per grade, which doesn't match with Thru's numbers.

Something is wrong with their numbers.[/quote]

wow, really interesting. I thought Anderson's whole goal was to move more families to Lewis, not move them out of Lewis into the already over-crowded (according to her) West Springfield. Sometime back around 2015, probably when Daventry got moved, those RV families really tried to get rezoned to Irving/WS and couldn't make it happen. Geographically, they are one of the few places where it does make sense to just switch the elementary and leave them at Key/Lewis. I don't get why Anderson would support them moving to WSHS.
Rolling Valley doesn't need to lose students, though. I think they'd be at about 76% capacity if those kids go to Saratoga. And the "program capacity", which looks on the high side for RVES, is because they have a large special ed and autism program and those kids utilize a lot of space. The general grade classrooms are really dwindling. Many of the grades only have two classrooms. Even losing 10-16 kids per grade would really reduced enrollment of the core classroom grades. [/quote]

Her goal seems to be move HV out of WSHS. Not sure how seeing as that is too many kids for SC schools. And she indicated Lewis is just a rumor but do we trust any of them?[/quote]

They can move kids out of HV to SC, but it would create a split feeder out of HV as SCMS/HS can’t accommodate an entire new feeder elementary. Especially not one as large as HV. Also the only way to do it that wouldn’t be a lopsided split feeder would be to send almost everyone south of the parkway to SC and that’s kind of a big ask.

Also Thru’s proposals no longer have the Hagel Circle attendance island at Hayfield, so although that area is higher on the elementary students than middle/high, it does keep more students at South County than the school board’s maps had in their presentations. Something to keep in mind unless the SB’s maps are adopted in the end. [/quote]

Exactly. She said the maps were a mistake and HV is supposed to move as a school so where does she propose they all go if they don’t do a split feeder?[/quote]
Lewis. It’s coming.[/quote]

But it was never even put forth as a proposal in any of the maps. Not from the SB/BRAC in the meeting PDFs, not from Thru in their maps. It has just never materialized as a possibility. I mean … they could technically spring anything on us at any time, but some/all of HVES to Lewis at this point would be a massive change out of left field. [/quote]

I agree, but [i]something[/i] is supposed to happen to the Hunt Valley in its entirety.

When asked publicly about the proposed Hunt Valley split feeder this past week, both Dr. Reid and Sandy Anderson stated that the Hunt Valley split feeder was not supposed to happen, it was a mistake, and Hunt Valley is supposed to move together. I also heard the they said something similar to the BRAC committee, that there were mistakes in this latest map, proposing split feeders that were not supposed to be on it, of schools that were supposed to move together.

If the school board has no advance knowlege of any of the rezoning plans, then how can they publicly claim that a school, in this case Hunt Valley but perhaps others from different parts of the county, is a "mistake" and is supposed to move as one unit?

[/quote]

I don’t trust or believe anything that most of the SB members are saying about the process at this point. They seem completely uninterested in it almost? Like, to the point of not even knowing what has been proposed so far and being surprised that the community members are looking at things so closely. Only Dunne has seemed on top of things as far as the boundary changes go. Basically what I’m saying is Anderson sounds like she has zero clue what’s going on and is not a reliable source. [/quote]

The board members have had to deal with a lot of grief from this process and most are frankly sick of it. I’ve heard that Sandy Anderson has burned a lot of capital with her antics and the school board isn’t particularly inclined to go along with her future suggestions on any boundary moves beyond what is currently in the maps.[/quote]

So she’s just talking out her ass about the RV split feeder staying at RV and then getting into Irving/WS? I thought the RV split staying as it is (RV, Key, Lewis) was on one of Thru’s scenario maps, but I don’t recall seeing RV/irving/WS no split feeder on any map … but she’s out here saying it … but are all the other SB members out there like “ok Sandy let’s get you to bed?” 🤔😂[/quote]

Thru's proposals have Rolling Valley kids who already go to RV/Key/Lewis moving to Saratoga/Key/Lewis on the second scenario "split feeder" adjustments. There is no Thru scenario where the RV/Key/Lewis kids switch to RV/Irving/WSHS. Apparently this is a Sandy Anderson thing that she said at PTA meetings at both WSHS and Rolling Valley in the last month. I would think the RV parents would like the Sandy Anderson version better than the Thru version, but I personally think Thru's version makes more sense. Though it also leaves Rolling Valley pretty empty.[/quote]

Yes, at the meeting she said it wasn’t fair and they would bring those RV kids to WSHS. McDaniel was also at the meeting but he didn’t say much. I think they’re going to take HV south of the parkway and move them to Newington Forest ES and then move a bunch of current NF kids out. I don’t know where there is space for them tho. [/quote]

There are Silverbrook kids getting moved to Sangster to replace the Sangster kids getting moved to Newington Forest. Maybe they will just create a 3 way and move Newington Forest kids to fill the spots of the Silverbrook kids getting rezoned to Sangster.[/quote]

I don’t know the exact number of kids but just for middle school they were estimating 95 or so kids would leave Irving for South County. Even if it were just 25 kids per grade for the south of the parkway HV kids, that’s like 175 or so kids. I don’t think NF ES has that kind of space but what do I know. I guess it would free up space to rezone some Orange Hunt kids to Hunt Valley.

[Anonymous]

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

And, some hope to improve it with a boundary adjustment.

The boundary adjustment is NOT the answer.

The School Board should look to improve Lewis. It is possible. They should not look to other students to improve it, but look to see what can be done to improve opportunities and instruction.
Is that not what a school is for?

I don't know the Lewis community. I live in another part of the county. But, I do remember when the Graham Road community wanted the school to stay put--because they had a community there. Instead the School Board "knew better" and moved them to a brand new school that requires walking along busy streets to get there.
And, now, I've read somewhere on this forum that the School Board wants to change that around and switch them to a different school. And, put another neighborhood in the new school.

How is that for creating community?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS website said that they have incorporated Coates into the comprehensive review. But, it also says they are making adjustments for 25-26. Does anyone know what these adjustments are?

It's probably the ES equivalent of removing lockers from crowded MS/HS. Oh, and cleaning up some of the trailers. They aren't changing the boundaries for this fall.

So, a comprehensive review that is very unpopular is preventing a solution to a school in crisis.
Good job, School Board and Michelle Reid.

[Anonymous]

Don’t want to quote all those posts where the quotes got messed up, but there will be a LOT of space at Halley ES in Lorton with them moving out the Hagel Circle kids. Like … a concerning amount of space. “Staffing changes” amount of space. If anything, they need to move kids out of Silverbrook to Halley (which does not change the MS/HS feeder situation since everyone already goes to SCMS/HS). That’s an easy change since they all basically live in the same neighborhoods. Why Thru moved some kids out of Silverbrook to fill out a small number of openings at Sangster and LB (as a result of moving that attendance island to Newington Forest) I have no idea. That was one of those things that wasn’t on the BRAC maps - Thru’s AI or whatever came up with it on their own. Silverbrook is one of those schools that is perpetually over crowded as hardly anyone leaves for the AAP center and it’s a desirable area for families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t want to quote all those posts where the quotes got messed up, but there will be a LOT of space at Halley ES in Lorton with them moving out the Hagel Circle kids. Like … a concerning amount of space. “Staffing changes” amount of space. If anything, they need to move kids out of Silverbrook to Halley (which does not change the MS/HS feeder situation since everyone already goes to SCMS/HS). That’s an easy change since they all basically live in the same neighborhoods. Why Thru moved some kids out of Silverbrook to fill out a small number of openings at Sangster and LB (as a result of moving that attendance island to Newington Forest) I have no idea. That was one of those things that wasn’t on the BRAC maps - Thru’s AI or whatever came up with it on their own. Silverbrook is one of those schools that is perpetually over crowded as hardly anyone leaves for the AAP center and it’s a desirable area for families.

Sangster is usually packed to the brim too, so it makes no sense to rezone anyone into Sangster, especially since both Sangster and definitely Lake Braddock are much farther away for those streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t want to quote all those posts where the quotes got messed up, but there will be a LOT of space at Halley ES in Lorton with them moving out the Hagel Circle kids. Like … a concerning amount of space. “Staffing changes” amount of space. If anything, they need to move kids out of Silverbrook to Halley (which does not change the MS/HS feeder situation since everyone already goes to SCMS/HS). That’s an easy change since they all basically live in the same neighborhoods. Why Thru moved some kids out of Silverbrook to fill out a small number of openings at Sangster and LB (as a result of moving that attendance island to Newington Forest) I have no idea. That was one of those things that wasn’t on the BRAC maps - Thru’s AI or whatever came up with it on their own. Silverbrook is one of those schools that is perpetually over crowded as hardly anyone leaves for the AAP center and it’s a desirable area for families.

Sangster is usually packed to the brim too, so it makes no sense to rezone anyone into Sangster, especially since both Sangster and definitely Lake Braddock are much farther away for those streets.

Yeah - that’s a nasty commute up to LB in rush hour. Lots of stop and go. Lorton and Fairfax Station are less trafficky especially if you can avoid the main roads. Taking Silverbrook the whole way to SCHS is easy compared to getting on Lee Chapel (which will soon be under construction if it isn’t already!) up to Burke Lake up to LB. It’s one of those things where it looks the same on a map if you’re not familiar with the area, but it’s quite different.

[Anonymous]

Yeah - that’s a nasty commute up to LB in rush hour. Lots of stop and go. Lorton and Fairfax Station are less trafficky especially if you can avoid the main roads. Taking Silverbrook the whole way to SCHS is easy compared to getting on Lee Chapel (which will soon be under construction if it isn’t already!) up to Burke Lake up to LB. It’s one of those things where it looks the same on a map if you’re not familiar with the area, but it’s quite different.

I don't live in that area, but this is what THRU does not understand.

I do know that when I take 123 to 95, that 123 can be total stop and go depending on the time of day.

And, THRU has not understanding of the roads where I live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The status quo isn't really working for Lewis, boundaries or academics. Yet nothing is being done. People on here talk about community, but Lewis really has no strong community. I would wager the neighborhoods that feed it have some of the highest private, homeschool, or pupil placement rates. Not a lot of Lewis graduate signs up right now.

And, some hope to improve it with a boundary adjustment.

The boundary adjustment is NOT the answer.

The School Board should look to improve Lewis. It is possible. They should not look to other students to improve it, but look to see what can be done to improve opportunities and instruction.
Is that not what a school is for?

I don't know the Lewis community. I live in another part of the county. But, I do remember when the Graham Road community wanted the school to stay put--because they had a community there. Instead the School Board "knew better" and moved them to a brand new school that requires walking along busy streets to get there.
And, now, I've read somewhere on this forum that the School Board wants to change that around and switch them to a different school. And, put another neighborhood in the new school.

How is that for creating community?

You're talking about the Graham Road/Timber Lane situation.

The "old" Graham Road ES mostly used to serve kids in the large, low-income Kingsley Commons community right next to the school.

The school was up for a renovation and, rather than renovate on a small plot, FCPS built a new school further away on Graham Road just south of Route 29. However, that site lay within the boundaries of Timber Lane ES, and they didn't want to change the boundaries. So for 13 years Kingsley Commons kids traveled to the "new" Graham Road school inside the Timber Lane attendance area.

Along comes Reid and Thru, and they decide that's a problem and the boundaries should be drawn so Graham Road lies within its attendance area. Sounds logical, but the solution involves moving the Kingsley Commons kids to Timber Lane, which is even further away than "new" Graham Road, and then changing Timber Lane's boundaries so that some of the Timber Lane kids north of Route 29 go to Shrevewood and the Timber Lane kids south of Route 29 flip to Graham Road, while Timber Lane south of Routh 29 is redrawn to pick up kids currently at Pine Spring and Graham Road.

Add to this the fact that Timber Lane north of Route 29 currently goes to McLean and Timber Lane south of Route 29 goes to Falls Church. Thru has proposed to move the area north of Route 29 to Falls Church, apparently to justify their expansion of Falls Church, and those Timber Lane families aren't happy about that. And then the Timber Lane families south of Route 29 feel like they're being disrespected, but they're all being moved to Graham Road anyway, so whatever "community" exists currently at Timber Lane is apparently going to be upended in any event.

It's kind of a mess.