FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poplar Heights and Donna Lee Gardens should be lobbying to move to Shrevewood in place of the apartments off Hollywood Rd. This would eliminate the risk of Shrevewood becoming an over capacity Title I school. They’d also be guaranteed their consolation pyramid (Kilmer/Marshall) and they’d physically share a border with the McLean HS boundary should the Shrevewood split feeder proposal stick.

Shrevewood parents crap all over their current poor kids (off Route 29 and outside the Beltway) so they probably aren't going to be very nice to the kids west of Hollywood Road, either. They want so bad to be Haycock South and instead the school is turning into Timber Lane West.

Shrevewood parents have given up on that community and school. Most families have taken their UMC kids to Lemon Road and it seems like most (all) would be happy to be redistricted to MHS. Pathetic little community of virtue signalers.

Aw, I'm sorry that you lost out on the house you put an offer on in Falls Hill, sweetie! Better luck next time!

The vibe at Poplar Heights pool with the proposed changes to Shrevewood and Timber Lane hanging over the community is going to be TENSE this summer.

It will be not be tense. Your wording “hanging over the community” is dramatic. There are FCC and St James families at the pool as well.

NP. Current member of the PH pool here. Have been three times in the last two weeks. Not one fellow member has talked to me about it once. Everybody just wants to live their life.

That person is clearly someone who is jealous that they can't buy a house in the area. There's no other reason.

Also we literally don't know anyone at the pool with kids at Timber Lane. Those neighborhoods are closer to the Lee-Graham pool, which is easier to get into and cheaper.

You do know that all the homes directly and indirectly surrounding the pool are zoned for Timber Lane. The pool itself is zoned for the school. You either are not a member or don’t know many people.

You're wrong, actually. If the school were a home, it would be zoned to Shrevewood. We know the family across the street.

DP. The address of the Poplar Heights pool is 2463 Buckelew Drive in Falls Church. Enter that address in the FCPS boundary locator and you get Timber Lane, Longfellow, and McLean. The AAP center for any dolphins that might have taken up residence in the pool is Haycock.

Houses across the street on Shreve Road are zoned to Shrevewood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While test scores and Zillow values are on everyone's mind right now, you're really quick to dismiss the previous poster.

Fairfax County, like most of the DC area, is highly segregated.

Parents here are lobbying to keep their kids in a low-poverty school with 1,165 white students (McLean).

They are vocally opposed to their children attending Falls Church, a majority-Hispanic school with 320 white students.

FCPS operated a segregated Black school in the Timber Lane/Beech Tree area until the 1965-66 school year.

Fairfax supervisors purposefully zoned areas near Marshall HS for apartments in the 1960s, in order to keep that type of housing away from downtown McLean.

Finally, the current "L" shape of the Timber Lane attendance area includes two apartment/condo areas that were historically black. These apartments were purposely built for former James Lee community members (at a time before fair housing laws were enforced).

With changes in FCPS demographics, and a growing population, the current boundaries make less sense today.

Chesterbrook in the McLean district was once a historically Black community.

Downtown McLean has multiple apartments now, as do other areas that currently feed into McLean HS in Tysons, near the WFC Metro, and off Route 29.

Moving Timber Lane north of Route 29 to Falls Church won't have much impact on Falls Church's demographics, even if it adds a few dozen White students to FCHS, but it will reduce the FARMS rate at McLean from 12% to about 8%.

Marshall will be impacted if they move part of Timber Lane that is almost entirely low-income to Shrevewood (as proposed) and rezone part of Westbriar that consists entirely of single-family homes to Madison (as proposed), but parents at McLean did not lobby for any of this.

With changes in FCPS demographics, and an expected flat student enrollment in the coming years, preserving the current feeder patterns at McLean, including the community that accounts for much of the current SES diversity there, makes more sense than ever.

[See how easy the counterpoint to your string of factoids was.]

You've said all this before. We get it.

Apparenty it didn't sink in. Pay more attention next time.

Some of us are paying attention to more than Timber Lane. You all can keep screaming and commenting into the void if it makes you feel better.

Dunno. You seem rather obsessed with it. Is it going to be your big "win" to go after one group of families for the sin of having attended a majority-minority school that apparently has too many white kids? Even if the result is to make that same school wealthier and whiter? Slow clap of the year.

THE GOAL OF BOUNDARY CHANGES IS NOT ABOUT DEMOGRAPHICS. Has that sunk in yet?

Stop screaming.

Their problem is they haven’t convinced people that the “problems” they’ve identified are truly problems, and the solutions they’ve identified to date are inelegant and in many cases create as many issues as they purport to resolve. It’s a classic case of the juice not being worth the squeeze.

You might also want to brush up on the law of unintended consequences.

The only “lens” they see through their own “lens of equity.”

Every other real problem does not matter to them. They will just astroturf the real problems and hide behind their NDA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Poplar Heights and Donna Lee Gardens should be lobbying to move to Shrevewood in place of the apartments off Hollywood Rd. This would eliminate the risk of Shrevewood becoming an over capacity Title I school. They’d also be guaranteed their consolation pyramid (Kilmer/Marshall) and they’d physically share a border with the McLean HS boundary should the Shrevewood split feeder proposal stick.

Shrevewood parents crap all over their current poor kids (off Route 29 and outside the Beltway) so they probably aren't going to be very nice to the kids west of Hollywood Road, either. They want so bad to be Haycock South and instead the school is turning into Timber Lane West.

Shrevewood parents have given up on that community and school. Most families have taken their UMC kids to Lemon Road and it seems like most (all) would be happy to be redistricted to MHS. Pathetic little community of virtue signalers.

Aw, I'm sorry that you lost out on the house you put an offer on in Falls Hill, sweetie! Better luck next time!

The vibe at Poplar Heights pool with the proposed changes to Shrevewood and Timber Lane hanging over the community is going to be TENSE this summer.

It will be not be tense. Your wording “hanging over the community” is dramatic. There are FCC and St James families at the pool as well.

NP. Current member of the PH pool here. Have been three times in the last two weeks. Not one fellow member has talked to me about it once. Everybody just wants to live their life.

That person is clearly someone who is jealous that they can't buy a house in the area. There's no other reason.

Also we literally don't know anyone at the pool with kids at Timber Lane. Those neighborhoods are closer to the Lee-Graham pool, which is easier to get into and cheaper.

You do know that all the homes directly and indirectly surrounding the pool are zoned for Timber Lane. The pool itself is zoned for the school. You either are not a member or don’t know many people.

You're wrong, actually. If the school were a home, it would be zoned to Shrevewood. We know the family across the street.

DP. The address of the Poplar Heights pool is 2463 Buckelew Drive in Falls Church. Enter that address in the FCPS boundary locator and you get Timber Lane, Longfellow, and McLean. The AAP center for any dolphins that might have taken up residence in the pool is Haycock.

Houses across the street on Shreve Road are zoned to Shrevewood.

All of the houses on one side of Buckelew (across the street from the pool) go to Shrevewood. Maybe I'm biased because I know who I know but we don't know any Timber Lane families at the school. I'm sure they are there, but almost everyone we see on a regular basis with kids are families we know from Shrevewood. Anyway, WHY are we talking about the pool? I thought we agreed that literally no one at the pool is talking about this. I've been several times in the past two weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what point does the school board get concerned that the outrage is intense enough that it starts to put their reelection in jeopardy?

I’d argue they’ve been playing with fire on this and at least a few of them are now vulnerable.

Even if one seat flips with an accompanying focus from that new board member on accountability it’d be fascinating to see what additional scandals might surface.

SB chair Karl Frisch had a political war-chest of over $400,000 during the last election, while every other candidate (D or R) had about $50,000. Karl donated most of his donations to other candidates, including disgraced Kyle McDaniel.

Karl only needs a simple majority on the Board to steam-roll through whatever changes he wants.

Your Board does not care what you think because they know they are invincible in FFX simply by virtue of the “D “ behind their name.

Karl Frisch does not have kids, does not have a background in education, received the majority of his financial support from California, and planned to use his original election as a one term step to higher office.

With all of this public knowledge, it is astonishing that his constituents reelected him, and even crazier that he will probably win again by large margins.

The alternative was a MAGA who wants guns in schools, so yeah, we choose the lesser of two evils.

When Frisch first sought the School Board seat in 2019, he got the Democratic endorsement over a very impressive young woman who had a background in data science.

He'd been raising money for Democratic candidates so he'd ingratiated himself with the FCDC members who voted in the endorsement process. The rest is history - the failed attempt to win a seat in the House of Delegates, the thwarted political ambitions, the Dunn Loring ES boondoggle that represents one of the biggest wastes of taxpayer money in FCPS history, the 2023 swearing-in on a stack of sexually explicit books, and this current mess of a boundary review that was Frisch's effort to try and avoid accountability on the part of School Board members for boundary changes (talk about a giant miscalculation).

It's sad to think how much better off we'd be if Jung Byun had gotten that endorsement back in 2019 and, perhaps, Frisch had returned to California by now. The lesser of two evils is still an evil.

[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:Poplar Heights and Donna Lee Gardens should be lobbying to move to Shrevewood in place of the apartments off Hollywood Rd. This would eliminate the risk of Shrevewood becoming an over capacity Title I school. They’d also be guaranteed their consolation pyramid (Kilmer/Marshall) and they’d physically share a border with the McLean HS boundary should the Shrevewood split feeder proposal stick.

Shrevewood parents crap all over their current poor kids (off Route 29 and outside the Beltway) so they probably aren't going to be very nice to the kids west of Hollywood Road, either. They want so bad to be Haycock South and instead the school is turning into Timber Lane West.

Shrevewood parents have given up on that community and school. Most families have taken their UMC kids to Lemon Road and it seems like most (all) would be happy to be redistricted to MHS. Pathetic little community of virtue signalers.

Aw, I'm sorry that you lost out on the house you put an offer on in Falls Hill, sweetie! Better luck next time!

The vibe at Poplar Heights pool with the proposed changes to Shrevewood and Timber Lane hanging over the community is going to be TENSE this summer.

It will be not be tense. Your wording “hanging over the community” is dramatic. There are FCC and St James families at the pool as well.

NP. Current member of the PH pool here. Have been three times in the last two weeks. Not one fellow member has talked to me about it once. Everybody just wants to live their life.

That person is clearly someone who is jealous that they can't buy a house in the area. There's no other reason.

Also we literally don't know anyone at the pool with kids at Timber Lane. Those neighborhoods are closer to the Lee-Graham pool, which is easier to get into and cheaper.

You do know that all the homes directly and indirectly surrounding the pool are zoned for Timber Lane. The pool itself is zoned for the school. You either are not a member or don’t know many people.

You're wrong, actually. If the school were a home, it would be zoned to Shrevewood. We know the family across the street.

DP. The address of the Poplar Heights pool is 2463 Buckelew Drive in Falls Church. Enter that address in the FCPS boundary locator and you get Timber Lane, Longfellow, and McLean. The AAP center for any dolphins that might have taken up residence in the pool is Haycock.

Houses across the street on Shreve Road are zoned to Shrevewood.

All of the houses on one side of Buckelew (across the street from the pool) go to Shrevewood. Maybe I'm biased because I know who I know but we don't know any Timber Lane families at the school. I'm sure they are there, but almost everyone we see on a regular basis with kids are families we know from Shrevewood. Anyway, WHY are we talking about the pool? I thought we agreed that literally no one at the pool is talking about this. I've been several times in the past two weeks.

I also don't know why the pool is discussed but we're long-time members of Poplar Heights pool who are zoned to TimberLane/LMS/McLean. So yes, we're there and we'd like to stay both at the pool and in the schools our neighbors and community belong to.

[Anonymous]

For those of you who attend the Boundary Review Community Meeting - Phase 2, would you recommend attending online or in-person? I just notice that it seems the majority of the meeting is having participants using the Thru consultant's platform to review and provide feedback during the meeting. Wouldn't it be difficult for many participants to who are on-site during the meeting to effectively do this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who attend the Boundary Review Community Meeting - Phase 2, would you recommend attending online or in-person? I just notice that it seems the majority of the meeting is having participants using the Thru consultant's platform to review and provide feedback during the meeting. Wouldn't it be difficult for many participants to who are on-site during the meeting to effectively do this?

Everyone just did it from their phones. I went in person. I talked with people at my table (who are in several pyramids). Not sure there is much discussion when virtual

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who attend the Boundary Review Community Meeting - Phase 2, would you recommend attending online or in-person? I just notice that it seems the majority of the meeting is having participants using the Thru consultant's platform to review and provide feedback during the meeting. Wouldn't it be difficult for many participants to who are on-site during the meeting to effectively do this?

It depends on what’s important to you. If you want to potentially have a chance to talk to Reid or some BRAC members in person, attend in person. If you want to provide feedback and review the feedback provided from others, it’s probably easier to do that from home than do it on your smart phone (which is an option) - you can scan the QR code.

My understanding is that at the meeting at Annandale last night they only had about 40 people show up in person vs about 125 who participated remotely by Zoom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what point does the school board get concerned that the outrage is intense enough that it starts to put their reelection in jeopardy?

I’d argue they’ve been playing with fire on this and at least a few of them are now vulnerable.

Even if one seat flips with an accompanying focus from that new board member on accountability it’d be fascinating to see what additional scandals might surface.

SB chair Karl Frisch had a political war-chest of over $400,000 during the last election, while every other candidate (D or R) had about $50,000. Karl donated most of his donations to other candidates, including disgraced Kyle McDaniel.

Karl only needs a simple majority on the Board to steam-roll through whatever changes he wants.

Your Board does not care what you think because they know they are invincible in FFX simply by virtue of the “D “ behind their name.

Karl Frisch does not have kids, does not have a background in education, received the majority of his financial support from California, and planned to use his original election as a one term step to higher office.

With all of this public knowledge, it is astonishing that his constituents reelected him, and even crazier that he will probably win again by large margins.

The alternative was a MAGA who wants guns in schools, so yeah, we choose the lesser of two evils.

"Vote for us--we don't suck as hard as the alternative" lol in a majority Dem county they ought to be able to do ALOT better than that. For shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those of you who attend the Boundary Review Community Meeting - Phase 2, would you recommend attending online or in-person? I just notice that it seems the majority of the meeting is having participants using the Thru consultant's platform to review and provide feedback during the meeting. Wouldn't it be difficult for many participants to who are on-site during the meeting to effectively do this?

Everyone just did it from their phones. I went in person. I talked with people at my table (who are in several pyramids). Not sure there is much discussion when virtual

My Zoom group had a decent discussion although some of the people never said anything. Topics discussed were Coates ES overcrowding (do something now to provide relief this fall), Timber Lane (don’t move north of Route 29 to Falls Church), proposed Hollin Meadows move to Mount Vernon (keep at West Potomac, as proposal creates a weird peninsula/split feeder) and the area at Lemon Road next door to Marshall proposed to move to McLean (keep at Marshall).

[Anonymous]

Oh look, another community feedback session where nobody wants their kids moved.

When will the school board get it through their thick skulls. Families do not want to move school pyramids.

[Anonymous]

I did the meeting online. My group talked.

The key piece is the feedback form to leave comments and vote for comments. People are sharing the link so you can do that and not Attend the meeting.

[Anonymous]

When they get to the detailed maps I plan to go in person if they are drastically changed from the ones already released. If there are minor changes, I will attend online. I guess it depends on how much new crap they throw our way. I think it is important to ask really good questions in person directly to Reid and board members because they won’t hear you online.

[Anonymous]

I’m in one of the neighborhoods that looks likely to move for elementary and one thing I haven’t seen in these discussions is SACC.

It doesn’t matter if you have a spot at your current location; you go to the bottom of the waitlist for your new school. Our family depends on SACC and the prospect of another years long wait list is so upsetting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m in one of the neighborhoods that looks likely to move for elementary and one thing I haven’t seen in these discussions is SACC.

It doesn’t matter if you have a spot at your current location; you go to the bottom of the waitlist for your new school. Our family depends on SACC and the prospect of another years long wait list is so upsetting

Where has this been stated? In previous boundary adjustments, if you were currently enrolled in a SACC service, it was transferred to the new school. Similarly, if you were on a wait list, it was transferred to the new school’s waitlist based on the creation date of the request.