APS elementary planning initiative called off

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are so far into stupid territory now, I feel like I lose brain cells every time I open this thread.

This is why they need to draw those boundaries now, so we can all stop wasting our time with this insanity.

No, that just gives us two rounds of stupid on ASFS. Now and in two years when they refine it before Reed opens.

That's why the entire boundary needs to be done for 2019. No reason to extend the pain.

That will mean the boundaries to be implemented for 2021 will be based on projections that are three years out of date at that point. They have been very explicit on this, any boundaries drawn now for 2021 will be checked again in 2020 to make sure they are still appropriate at that time. Again with the stupid.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so. You hear the echo chamber? Sounds loud to me.

Projections are fairly stable. They might make a couple planning unit refinements here and there for 2021 to ASFS, but the big change will be in 2019.

Projections are fine, but they can't project what the decision will be on moving options schools, which politically they want to make the decision close to implementation time so less time for backpedaling. They can decide in 2018 to move Key to Nottingham in 2021, but that's 3 years of gnashing teeth and matched t-shirts at every school board meeting. If they just table No Arlington, MAYBE move a few southern ASFS boundary PUs to LB if Fleet gives it breathing room, that's all they can do until the final decision on option locations is set.

Key isn't moving to Nottingham, APS already said the only program that would work at Nottingham is ATS. Immersion already struggles to attract enough spanish-speaking students, moving it away from spanish-speaking families will only make it worse. Putting ATS north of Lee Highway is just as shitty an idea because whether they put it at Nottingham or Tuckahoe there will be hundreds of families who could just as easily walk to ATS as to their neighborhood school, they will flood ATS with applications and UMC SA families can kiss it goodbye.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are so far into stupid territory now, I feel like I lose brain cells every time I open this thread.

This is why they need to draw those boundaries now, so we can all stop wasting our time with this insanity.

No, that just gives us two rounds of stupid on ASFS. Now and in two years when they refine it before Reed opens.

That's why the entire boundary needs to be done for 2019. No reason to extend the pain.

That will mean the boundaries to be implemented for 2021 will be based on projections that are three years out of date at that point. They have been very explicit on this, any boundaries drawn now for 2021 will be checked again in 2020 to make sure they are still appropriate at that time. Again with the stupid.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so. You hear the echo chamber? Sounds loud to me.

Projections are fairly stable. They might make a couple planning unit refinements here and there for 2021 to ASFS, but the big change will be in 2019.

Projections are fine, but they can't project what the decision will be on moving options schools, which politically they want to make the decision close to implementation time so less time for backpedaling. They can decide in 2018 to move Key to Nottingham in 2021, but that's 3 years of gnashing teeth and matched t-shirts at every school board meeting. If they just table No Arlington, MAYBE move a few southern ASFS boundary PUs to LB if Fleet gives it breathing room, that's all they can do until the final decision on option locations is set.

Key isn't moving to Nottingham, APS already said the only program that would work at Nottingham is ATS. Immersion already struggles to attract enough spanish-speaking students, moving it away from spanish-speaking families will only make it worse. Putting ATS north of Lee Highway is just as shitty an idea because whether they put it at Nottingham or Tuckahoe there will be hundreds of families who could just as easily walk to ATS as to their neighborhood school, they will flood ATS with applications and UMC SA families can kiss it goodbye.

YES! I don’t understand why more people weren’t seeing this. Moving ATS to any NW school would only lessen economic diversity. You cannot increase diversity with the existing lottery system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

I heard about t-shirts from many Lyon Village parents, who have no skin in this game.

And I never said yellow, so...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

I heard about t-shirts from many Lyon Village parents, who have no skin in this game.

And I never said yellow, so...

There is video of every SB meeting. So either show proof or stop spreading lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

I heard about t-shirts from many Lyon Village parents, who have no skin in this game.

And I never said yellow, so...

There is video of every SB meeting. So either show proof or stop spreading lies.

If pp had proof, he'd have shared it already. He's being coy because he's lying through this teeth. Ignore him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

If you are going to lie and claim that something has been disproven, you really should make sure that there isn’t video evidence proving that you were wrong. Please see exhibit A, Swarm of yellow T-shirts. https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-april-19-2018/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

I heard about t-shirts from many Lyon Village parents, who have no skin in this game.

And I never said yellow, so...

There is video of every SB meeting. So either show proof or stop spreading lies.

*mic drop*

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-april-19-2018/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

I heard about t-shirts from many Lyon Village parents, who have no skin in this game.

And I never said yellow, so...

There is video of every SB meeting. So either show proof or stop spreading lies.

*mic drop*

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-april-19-2018/

Wait you mean the folks who are staying to not move the school?!?! This was already debunked. If you actually watch the three speakers in yellow shirts. Quote one thing they say that is exclusionary or divisive.

*mic drop*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are so far into stupid territory now, I feel like I lose brain cells every time I open this thread.

This is why they need to draw those boundaries now, so we can all stop wasting our time with this insanity.

No, that just gives us two rounds of stupid on ASFS. Now and in two years when they refine it before Reed opens.

That's why the entire boundary needs to be done for 2019. No reason to extend the pain.

That will mean the boundaries to be implemented for 2021 will be based on projections that are three years out of date at that point. They have been very explicit on this, any boundaries drawn now for 2021 will be checked again in 2020 to make sure they are still appropriate at that time. Again with the stupid.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so. You hear the echo chamber? Sounds loud to me.

Projections are fairly stable. They might make a couple planning unit refinements here and there for 2021 to ASFS, but the big change will be in 2019.

Projections are fine, but they can't project what the decision will be on moving options schools, which politically they want to make the decision close to implementation time so less time for backpedaling. They can decide in 2018 to move Key to Nottingham in 2021, but that's 3 years of gnashing teeth and matched t-shirts at every school board meeting. If they just table No Arlington, MAYBE move a few southern ASFS boundary PUs to LB if Fleet gives it breathing room, that's all they can do until the final decision on option locations is set.

Key isn't moving to Nottingham, APS already said the only program that would work at Nottingham is ATS. Immersion already struggles to attract enough spanish-speaking students, moving it away from spanish-speaking families will only make it worse. Putting ATS north of Lee Highway is just as shitty an idea because whether they put it at Nottingham or Tuckahoe there will be hundreds of families who could just as easily walk to ATS as to their neighborhood school, they will flood ATS with applications and UMC SA families can kiss it goodbye.

YES! I don’t understand why more people weren’t seeing this. Moving ATS to any NW school would only lessen economic diversity. You cannot increase diversity with the existing lottery system.

It’s not that people aren’t seeing it, it’s that with today’s projections, an option school will need to go to one of the current NW neighborhood schools once Reed opens and there are lots of empty seats in NW. The SB has said that no new option schools will be created, so an existing option school will likely be shifted there to free up room elsewhere. Immersion from Key to current ATS bldg, ATS program to NW school makes sense to a lot of people because that shift would free up Key to be a neighborhood school where seats will be needed, and keeps immersion out of a far NW corner of the county.

Maybe lobbying the SB to alter the lottery process would produce a more satisfactory result that trying to control what program goes where in the face of the tight constraints that are an Arlington reality.

[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:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

I heard about t-shirts from many Lyon Village parents, who have no skin in this game.

And I never said yellow, so...

There is video of every SB meeting. So either show proof or stop spreading lies.

*mic drop*

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-april-19-2018/

Wait you mean the folks who are staying to not move the school?!?! This was already debunked. If you actually watch the three speakers in yellow shirts. Quote one thing they say that is exclusionary or divisive.

*mic drop*

First you claimed that there were no T-shirts, and now you ignore the speaker complaining about traffic, when you know that all of the people from Rosslyn Bus or are driven to school. He was advocating for a walk zone in not so subtle terms. But you can go ahead and keep moving the goalposts and pretending that you didn’t live before. No worries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are so far into stupid territory now, I feel like I lose brain cells every time I open this thread.

This is why they need to draw those boundaries now, so we can all stop wasting our time with this insanity.

No, that just gives us two rounds of stupid on ASFS. Now and in two years when they refine it before Reed opens.

That's why the entire boundary needs to be done for 2019. No reason to extend the pain.

That will mean the boundaries to be implemented for 2021 will be based on projections that are three years out of date at that point. They have been very explicit on this, any boundaries drawn now for 2021 will be checked again in 2020 to make sure they are still appropriate at that time. Again with the stupid.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so. You hear the echo chamber? Sounds loud to me.

Projections are fairly stable. They might make a couple planning unit refinements here and there for 2021 to ASFS, but the big change will be in 2019.

Projections are fine, but they can't project what the decision will be on moving options schools, which politically they want to make the decision close to implementation time so less time for backpedaling. They can decide in 2018 to move Key to Nottingham in 2021, but that's 3 years of gnashing teeth and matched t-shirts at every school board meeting. If they just table No Arlington, MAYBE move a few southern ASFS boundary PUs to LB if Fleet gives it breathing room, that's all they can do until the final decision on option locations is set.

Key isn't moving to Nottingham, APS already said the only program that would work at Nottingham is ATS. Immersion already struggles to attract enough spanish-speaking students, moving it away from spanish-speaking families will only make it worse. Putting ATS north of Lee Highway is just as shitty an idea because whether they put it at Nottingham or Tuckahoe there will be hundreds of families who could just as easily walk to ATS as to their neighborhood school, they will flood ATS with applications and UMC SA families can kiss it goodbye.

YES! I don’t understand why more people weren’t seeing this. Moving ATS to any NW school would only lessen economic diversity. You cannot increase diversity with the existing lottery system.

It’s not that people aren’t seeing it, it’s that with today’s projections, an option school will need to go to one of the current NW neighborhood schools once Reed opens and there are lots of empty seats in NW. The SB has said that no new option schools will be created, so an existing option school will likely be shifted there to free up room elsewhere. Immersion from Key to current ATS bldg, ATS program to NW school makes sense to a lot of people because that shift would free up Key to be a neighborhood school where seats will be needed, and keeps immersion out of a far NW corner of the county.

Maybe lobbying the SB to alter the lottery process would produce a more satisfactory result that trying to control what program goes where in the face of the tight constraints that are an Arlington reality.

If they move immersion to Carlin Springs and Barcroft, Ashlawn's boundaries can go across 50 and pick up the a lot of the displaced students. That will easily fill the excess capacity in NW. The other boundaries will be a little awkward, that's true, but it keeps option schools more accessible and helps alleviate some of the poverty concentration south of 50. Literally the only people who will benefit from moving ATS north of Lee Highway are the staff when it gets easier to draw boundaries there and the people living north of Lee Highway whose home values will skyrocket when they're walkable to both a top neighborhood school and ATS.

[Anonymous]

I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.

A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.

Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?

Isn't that what Rosslyn PTA members want to do now? From what I've read on this thread, they seem to hate them all and want them removed from the school?

Very likely that is what they want now, but its a response to the pre-emptive actions from Cherrydale community members making space for themselves at the expense of current Rosslyn students. A bit different; Rosslyn parents were part of the group recommending the Buck site, which is an inclusive approach to make space for all who want to attend their neighborhood school.

Absolutely incorrect. The whole Buck idea was originally thought of and advocated for those who live near the school. They were advocating to expand the school onto Buck last year during the Options and Transfer process, before the Rosslyn folks even understood what was going on. The fact is the Rosslyn/Courthosue crew is an angry and vindictive group who have said and done some really nasty things to several really good people. These same people who were ironically advocating for them. So sad.

Maybe, but there was definitely a contingent of folks from Cherrydale campaigning for Rosslyn to bus to Taylor, who were very vocal on this board and in SB meetings.

Really? What SB meetings precisely? The same one they wore the yellow T-shirts? That’s already been disproven.

Thought so. Rosslyn folks got nothing but deceit.

I heard about t-shirts from many Lyon Village parents, who have no skin in this game.

And I never said yellow, so...

There is video of every SB meeting. So either show proof or stop spreading lies.

*mic drop*

https://www.apsva.us/post/school-board-meeting-april-19-2018/

"*mic drop*" goes after you speak, not before.

Also, the people in yellow shirts were talking about not putting an option school at ASFS, not about where boundaries should go. The guy talking about traffic was talking about how much traffic would increase with an option school and how the area around the school isn't equipped to handle it. It's the same argument the Nottingham folks made for their school. The argument about walkability calculations was also very similar to the argument the Nottingham folks made, that the staff was minimizing walkability at some locations to make them appear to be better option sites than they actually are.