APS Boundary tool--anyone get it to work yet?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the day WF is on par with WL/YT is the day this boundary tinkering can finally stop for good, not a second sooner.

Yes. But I despair of that happening when many people in certain odd zip codes talk about their property values rather than social justice (and let's be clear, this is not about property values plummeting, just about how fast they'll rise).

Maybe there are those people. But accusing everyone in that zip code, or the "north" in general, of racism and other sundry defects is a great way to force otherwise sympathetic people into an "us vs them" mindset.

I think it's unmasking the us vs them mindset, in which members of a certain zip code (and no one is saying all members, even if that's what people hear) operate from the assumption that they're entitled to everything they have, and more, and maybe they will do a little something for other members of their community who have fewer advantages. Not because studies show that it's better for kids with lots of advantages to be in close contact with kids with fewer (even though that's true), but because clinging to what you've got and demanding more makes you a terrible person.

And if you need strokes and congratulations to step up and share with your fellow Arlingtonians, if you're upset because someone said something that you think was a reference to you and it hurt your feelings, if you're going to act like a greedy douche unless people ask nicely, get over yourself.

Sorry. That came out wrong. I meant "Your hair looks pretty and you've worked for everything you have."

I love you.

[Anonymous]

this is a relatively minor boundary adjustment and already everyone is losing their minds. I honestly just want them to come up with enough seats for everyone, but instead of focusing on that, everyone is just yelling back and forth over the internet about i'm not even sure what at this point. Make the board give us a fourth high school. Can we at least agree on that????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:this is a relatively minor boundary adjustment and already everyone is losing their minds. I honestly just want them to come up with enough seats for everyone, but instead of focusing on that, everyone is just yelling back and forth over the internet about i'm not even sure what at this point. Make the board give us a fourth high school. Can we at least agree on that????

No we can't.
The high school size is 2200. The high school seat deficit is 1300. Considering how scarce land is in the county, I just don't see how it is a prudent use of land resources to use it for a 4th comprehensive high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is a relatively minor boundary adjustment and already everyone is losing their minds. I honestly just want them to come up with enough seats for everyone, but instead of focusing on that, everyone is just yelling back and forth over the internet about i'm not even sure what at this point. Make the board give us a fourth high school. Can we at least agree on that????

No we can't.
The high school size is 2200. The high school seat deficit is 1300. Considering how scarce land is in the county, I just don't see how it is a prudent use of land resources to use it for a 4th comprehensive high school.

3000.
They are projecting a future deficit of 3000. Not in the next 5 years, but it's coming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is a relatively minor boundary adjustment and already everyone is losing their minds. I honestly just want them to come up with enough seats for everyone, but instead of focusing on that, everyone is just urth high school. Can we at least agree on that????

No we can't.
The high school size is 2200. The high school seat deficit is 1300. Considering how scarce land is in the county, I just don't see how it is a prudent use of land resources to use it for a 4th comprehensive high school.[/quote


3000.
They are projecting a future deficit of 3000. Not in the next 5 years, but it's coming.

What's the source for 3000?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:this is a relatively minor boundary adjustment and already everyone is losing their minds. I honestly just want them to come up with enough seats for everyone, but instead of focusing on that, everyone is just urth high school. Can we at least agree on that????

No we can't.
The high school size is 2200. The high school seat deficit is 1300. Considering how scarce land is in the county, I just don't see how it is a prudent use of land resources to use it for a 4th comprehensive high school.[/quote


3000.
They are projecting a future deficit of 3000. Not in the next 5 years, but it's coming.

What's the source for 3000?

APS

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/legacy_assets/www/f97966552b-APS_Enrollment_Report_Online_Version.pdf


9700 students by 2025, and that is their projections that haven't been super reliable. They tend to underestimate.

[Anonymous]

The options are out, now it's time for people to really lose their mind! Our planning unit was not included in any of the options. Glad to be staying put

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The options are out, now it's time for people to really lose their mind! Our planning unit was not included in any of the options. Glad to be staying put

Any way to see them online?

[Anonymous]

What do you you mean options are out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you you mean options are out?

The meeting was tonight where they presented 3 options for wakefield and 3 for yorktown. I really feel this was si drawn out for no reason. WHy not just come out with 3 options and let everyone chime in on the 3 proposals. we have no way of knowing if they even read any if the proposals and actually considered any of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The options are out, now it's time for people to really lose their mind! Our planning unit was not included in any of the options. Glad to be staying put

Any way to see them online?

They said it would be posted online by tomorrow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The options are out, now it's time for people to really lose their mind! Our planning unit was not included in any of the options. Glad to be staying put

Any way to see them online?

They said it would be posted online by tomorrow.

Here is the link to the meeting. The options are shown around minute 24.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mzzdGANpOI

APS seems to have done a good job trying to balance out their priorities.

[Anonymous]

Wakefield
option 1
4612, 4614, 4828

option 2
1201, 1202, 1203

option 3
3706,4611,4612, 4691

Yorktown
opt 1
1302, 1303, 3501, 3502,3503

opt 2
1502, 2312, 2313,2314

opt 3
1304, 1410

[Anonymous]

Um why did they only comment on number of free and reduced lunch students moving to Yorktown?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um why did they only comment on number of free and reduced lunch students moving to Yorktown?

I watched the meeting. They did comment on the # for Wakefield too.