Why is the Foxhall Community Citizens Association scared of public school children?

[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:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

So we've gone from a Foxhall school should be opposed because it will draw students from Stoddert, to a Foxhall school should be opposed because the money could be diverted to Stoddert. Beggar-thy-neighbors much?

Huh? Keep the Foxhall school, but not 500 kids. That would make it bigger than Stoddert, but in a suburban area that is a fraction of the population density of Glover Park. Expand Stoddert 100 seats. Only the NIMBYs are unhappy. DCPS spends the same amount of money, nobody has to drive to school, fewer kids get hurt in car accidents, less traffic. Not sure what the problem is.

I'm a supporter of the school and this strikes me as a reasonable compromise. The issue, though, is that every expansion that DCPS has done recently has been full almost as soon as it was open. Hyde-Addison opened a third entire building in SY19-20 and has now cut PK3 entirely for SY22-23 because it has again run out of space. Opponents of the school (from Foxhall and Glover Park) like to claim that the school won't be filled, but that certainly hasn't been the recent experience with other nearby schools. Probably the best option is to build it in such a way that it can be reasonably quickly expanded if demand does materialize.

Every projection is based on existing behavior, because that's all you can base it on. But good schools are a draw, and people move to get into them.

Fair, so both predicted and actual population growth for kids was the highest in Glover Park. Glover Park actually wants the construction. Glover park isn't exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. Why aren't we just building a second school on the Stoddert footprint? If the Foxhall site can fit two schools, why can't that be true at Stoddert?

Yes, Glover Park isn’t exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. And it’s also true that Foxhall isn’t exactly walkable to Glover Park for 7 years. And Key isn’t exactly walkable for 7 year olds in Foxhall either.

Why are people from Glover Park lobbying against a walkable elementary school for Foxhall kids while claiming that their having a walkable school is of utmost importance? Do you realize how these arguments look?

Foxhall families want their walkable elementary school construction as well.

There is also not a single site at Foxhall that will be getting two schools. Foxhall ES and MacArthur HS will be located at two different sites on two different blocks.

The problem is DCPS's proposal to build a walkable school in Foxhall by eliminating the walkable school for part of Glover Park.

For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION. The DCPS Chancellor spoke to the ANC that covers Glover Park last night and confirmed that DCPS has no such plans and will strive - as in all cases - to ensure that the opening of new schools doesn't result in families being assigned to schools that are further away than those their children currently attend.

I would characterize him as saying nothing at all regarding this. I wouldn't draw anything from him either way from that meeting.

[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:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

So we've gone from a Foxhall school should be opposed because it will draw students from Stoddert, to a Foxhall school should be opposed because the money could be diverted to Stoddert. Beggar-thy-neighbors much?

Huh? Keep the Foxhall school, but not 500 kids. That would make it bigger than Stoddert, but in a suburban area that is a fraction of the population density of Glover Park. Expand Stoddert 100 seats. Only the NIMBYs are unhappy. DCPS spends the same amount of money, nobody has to drive to school, fewer kids get hurt in car accidents, less traffic. Not sure what the problem is.

I'm a supporter of the school and this strikes me as a reasonable compromise. The issue, though, is that every expansion that DCPS has done recently has been full almost as soon as it was open. Hyde-Addison opened a third entire building in SY19-20 and has now cut PK3 entirely for SY22-23 because it has again run out of space. Opponents of the school (from Foxhall and Glover Park) like to claim that the school won't be filled, but that certainly hasn't been the recent experience with other nearby schools. Probably the best option is to build it in such a way that it can be reasonably quickly expanded if demand does materialize.

Every projection is based on existing behavior, because that's all you can base it on. But good schools are a draw, and people move to get into them.

Fair, so both predicted and actual population growth for kids was the highest in Glover Park. Glover Park actually wants the construction. Glover park isn't exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. Why aren't we just building a second school on the Stoddert footprint? If the Foxhall site can fit two schools, why can't that be true at Stoddert?

Yes, Glover Park isn’t exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. And it’s also true that Foxhall isn’t exactly walkable to Glover Park for 7 years. And Key isn’t exactly walkable for 7 year olds in Foxhall either.

Why are people from Glover Park lobbying against a walkable elementary school for Foxhall kids while claiming that their having a walkable school is of utmost importance? Do you realize how these arguments look?

Foxhall families want their walkable elementary school construction as well.

There is also not a single site at Foxhall that will be getting two schools. Foxhall ES and MacArthur HS will be located at two different sites on two different blocks.

The problem is DCPS's proposal to build a walkable school in Foxhall by eliminating the walkable school for part of Glover Park.

For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION. The DCPS Chancellor spoke to the ANC that covers Glover Park last night and confirmed that DCPS has no such plans and will strive - as in all cases - to ensure that the opening of new schools doesn't result in families being assigned to schools that are further away than those their children currently attend.

I would characterize him as saying nothing at all regarding this. I wouldn't draw anything from him either way from that meeting.

Indeed. The Chancellor confirmed that DCPS has NO plans to "eliminat[e] the walkable school for part of Glover Park." None. Can people on here (and elsewhere) now please stop saying that DCPS has a plan to do this?

[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:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

So we've gone from a Foxhall school should be opposed because it will draw students from Stoddert, to a Foxhall school should be opposed because the money could be diverted to Stoddert. Beggar-thy-neighbors much?

Huh? Keep the Foxhall school, but not 500 kids. That would make it bigger than Stoddert, but in a suburban area that is a fraction of the population density of Glover Park. Expand Stoddert 100 seats. Only the NIMBYs are unhappy. DCPS spends the same amount of money, nobody has to drive to school, fewer kids get hurt in car accidents, less traffic. Not sure what the problem is.

I'm a supporter of the school and this strikes me as a reasonable compromise. The issue, though, is that every expansion that DCPS has done recently has been full almost as soon as it was open. Hyde-Addison opened a third entire building in SY19-20 and has now cut PK3 entirely for SY22-23 because it has again run out of space. Opponents of the school (from Foxhall and Glover Park) like to claim that the school won't be filled, but that certainly hasn't been the recent experience with other nearby schools. Probably the best option is to build it in such a way that it can be reasonably quickly expanded if demand does materialize.

Every projection is based on existing behavior, because that's all you can base it on. But good schools are a draw, and people move to get into them.

Fair, so both predicted and actual population growth for kids was the highest in Glover Park. Glover Park actually wants the construction. Glover park isn't exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. Why aren't we just building a second school on the Stoddert footprint? If the Foxhall site can fit two schools, why can't that be true at Stoddert?

Yes, Glover Park isn’t exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. And it’s also true that Foxhall isn’t exactly walkable to Glover Park for 7 years. And Key isn’t exactly walkable for 7 year olds in Foxhall either.

Why are people from Glover Park lobbying against a walkable elementary school for Foxhall kids while claiming that their having a walkable school is of utmost importance? Do you realize how these arguments look?

Foxhall families want their walkable elementary school construction as well.

There is also not a single site at Foxhall that will be getting two schools. Foxhall ES and MacArthur HS will be located at two different sites on two different blocks.

The problem is DCPS's proposal to build a walkable school in Foxhall by eliminating the walkable school for part of Glover Park.

For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION. The DCPS Chancellor spoke to the ANC that covers Glover Park last night and confirmed that DCPS has no such plans and will strive - as in all cases - to ensure that the opening of new schools doesn't result in families being assigned to schools that are further away than those their children currently attend.

I would characterize him as saying nothing at all regarding this. I wouldn't draw anything from him either way from that meeting.

Indeed. The Chancellor confirmed that DCPS has NO plans to "eliminat[e] the walkable school for part of Glover Park." None. Can people on here (and elsewhere) now please stop saying that DCPS has a plan to do this?

That is a tendentious misreading. The Chancellor claimed to have no plans either way, not your implication he has some plan that does not do this.

To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

[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:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

So we've gone from a Foxhall school should be opposed because it will draw students from Stoddert, to a Foxhall school should be opposed because the money could be diverted to Stoddert. Beggar-thy-neighbors much?

Huh? Keep the Foxhall school, but not 500 kids. That would make it bigger than Stoddert, but in a suburban area that is a fraction of the population density of Glover Park. Expand Stoddert 100 seats. Only the NIMBYs are unhappy. DCPS spends the same amount of money, nobody has to drive to school, fewer kids get hurt in car accidents, less traffic. Not sure what the problem is.

I'm a supporter of the school and this strikes me as a reasonable compromise. The issue, though, is that every expansion that DCPS has done recently has been full almost as soon as it was open. Hyde-Addison opened a third entire building in SY19-20 and has now cut PK3 entirely for SY22-23 because it has again run out of space. Opponents of the school (from Foxhall and Glover Park) like to claim that the school won't be filled, but that certainly hasn't been the recent experience with other nearby schools. Probably the best option is to build it in such a way that it can be reasonably quickly expanded if demand does materialize.

Every projection is based on existing behavior, because that's all you can base it on. But good schools are a draw, and people move to get into them.

Fair, so both predicted and actual population growth for kids was the highest in Glover Park. Glover Park actually wants the construction. Glover park isn't exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. Why aren't we just building a second school on the Stoddert footprint? If the Foxhall site can fit two schools, why can't that be true at Stoddert?

Yes, Glover Park isn’t exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. And it’s also true that Foxhall isn’t exactly walkable to Glover Park for 7 years. And Key isn’t exactly walkable for 7 year olds in Foxhall either.

Why are people from Glover Park lobbying against a walkable elementary school for Foxhall kids while claiming that their having a walkable school is of utmost importance? Do you realize how these arguments look?

Foxhall families want their walkable elementary school construction as well.

There is also not a single site at Foxhall that will be getting two schools. Foxhall ES and MacArthur HS will be located at two different sites on two different blocks.

The problem is DCPS's proposal to build a walkable school in Foxhall by eliminating the walkable school for part of Glover Park.

For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION. The DCPS Chancellor spoke to the ANC that covers Glover Park last night and confirmed that DCPS has no such plans and will strive - as in all cases - to ensure that the opening of new schools doesn't result in families being assigned to schools that are further away than those their children currently attend.

I would characterize him as saying nothing at all regarding this. I wouldn't draw anything from him either way from that meeting.

Indeed. The Chancellor confirmed that DCPS has NO plans to "eliminat[e] the walkable school for part of Glover Park." None. Can people on here (and elsewhere) now please stop saying that DCPS has a plan to do this?

That is a tendentious misreading. The Chancellor claimed to have no plans either way, not your implication he has some plan that does not do this.

To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

It could not be clearer. They have no plans regarding the boundaries. They have no plans to move students from Glover Park to Foxhall ES. They have no plans not to move Glover Park to Foxhall ES.

You are free to use your imagination to conjure up whatever conspiracies float your boat, but the rest of us know that as baseless speculation and are duty bound to call it out.

Misleading others with wild conspiracy theories is the currency that the FCCA trades in; apparently they are now doing it on behalf of Glover Park residents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

What “evidence”? There was a single example map that was released by the CWG, not DCPS. Multiple CWG members have clarified that the boundaries on that map were not proposed to DCPS and are not realistic. Representing that single map as “DCPS plans” is a bald lie perpetuated by those with ulterior motives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

What “evidence”? There was a single example map that was released by the CWG, not DCPS. Multiple CWG members have clarified that the boundaries on that map were not proposed to DCPS and are not realistic. Representing that single map as “DCPS plans” is a bald lie perpetuated by those with ulterior motives.

The problem is the Stoddert expansion isn't actually an expansion. The math simply doesn't work out unless the CWG map or a similar variant is used. If they had said they were added 100 instead of 20 seats at stoddert, I'd believe that stoddert kids would still all be able to walk to school.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

So we've gone from a Foxhall school should be opposed because it will draw students from Stoddert, to a Foxhall school should be opposed because the money could be diverted to Stoddert. Beggar-thy-neighbors much?

Huh? Keep the Foxhall school, but not 500 kids. That would make it bigger than Stoddert, but in a suburban area that is a fraction of the population density of Glover Park. Expand Stoddert 100 seats. Only the NIMBYs are unhappy. DCPS spends the same amount of money, nobody has to drive to school, fewer kids get hurt in car accidents, less traffic. Not sure what the problem is.

I'm a supporter of the school and this strikes me as a reasonable compromise. The issue, though, is that every expansion that DCPS has done recently has been full almost as soon as it was open. Hyde-Addison opened a third entire building in SY19-20 and has now cut PK3 entirely for SY22-23 because it has again run out of space. Opponents of the school (from Foxhall and Glover Park) like to claim that the school won't be filled, but that certainly hasn't been the recent experience with other nearby schools. Probably the best option is to build it in such a way that it can be reasonably quickly expanded if demand does materialize.

Every projection is based on existing behavior, because that's all you can base it on. But good schools are a draw, and people move to get into them.

Fair, so both predicted and actual population growth for kids was the highest in Glover Park. Glover Park actually wants the construction. Glover park isn't exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. Why aren't we just building a second school on the Stoddert footprint? If the Foxhall site can fit two schools, why can't that be true at Stoddert?

Yes, Glover Park isn’t exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. And it’s also true that Foxhall isn’t exactly walkable to Glover Park for 7 years. And Key isn’t exactly walkable for 7 year olds in Foxhall either.

Why are people from Glover Park lobbying against a walkable elementary school for Foxhall kids while claiming that their having a walkable school is of utmost importance? Do you realize how these arguments look?

Foxhall families want their walkable elementary school construction as well.

There is also not a single site at Foxhall that will be getting two schools. Foxhall ES and MacArthur HS will be located at two different sites on two different blocks.

The problem is DCPS's proposal to build a walkable school in Foxhall by eliminating the walkable school for part of Glover Park.

For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION. The DCPS Chancellor spoke to the ANC that covers Glover Park last night and confirmed that DCPS has no such plans and will strive - as in all cases - to ensure that the opening of new schools doesn't result in families being assigned to schools that are further away than those their children currently attend.

I would characterize him as saying nothing at all regarding this. I wouldn't draw anything from him either way from that meeting.

Indeed. The Chancellor confirmed that DCPS has NO plans to "eliminat[e] the walkable school for part of Glover Park." None. Can people on here (and elsewhere) now please stop saying that DCPS has a plan to do this?

That is a tendentious misreading. The Chancellor claimed to have no plans either way, not your implication he has some plan that does not do this.

To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

It could not be clearer. They have no plans regarding the boundaries. They have no plans to move students from Glover Park to Foxhall ES. They have no plans not to move Glover Park to Foxhall ES.

You are free to use your imagination to conjure up whatever conspiracies float your boat, but the rest of us know that as baseless speculation and are duty bound to call it out.

Misleading others with wild conspiracy theories is the currency that the FCCA trades in; apparently they are now doing it on behalf of Glover Park residents.

This. Right here.

If you do not embrace this in your thinking, I have no interest talking with you and I will lobby to have you left on the outside of any serious discussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

What “evidence”? There was a single example map that was released by the CWG, not DCPS. Multiple CWG members have clarified that the boundaries on that map were not proposed to DCPS and are not realistic. Representing that single map as “DCPS plans” is a bald lie perpetuated by those with ulterior motives.

The problem is the Stoddert expansion isn't actually an expansion. The math simply doesn't work out unless the CWG map or a similar variant is used. If they had said they were added 100 instead of 20 seats at stoddert, I'd believe that stoddert kids would still all be able to walk to school.

The math also doesn't work out that money can be shifted from Foxhall to Stoddert to get the same number of seats for the same money. A smaller school is more expensive per seat. Renovation is more expensive than new construction.

[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:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

So we've gone from a Foxhall school should be opposed because it will draw students from Stoddert, to a Foxhall school should be opposed because the money could be diverted to Stoddert. Beggar-thy-neighbors much?

Huh? Keep the Foxhall school, but not 500 kids. That would make it bigger than Stoddert, but in a suburban area that is a fraction of the population density of Glover Park. Expand Stoddert 100 seats. Only the NIMBYs are unhappy. DCPS spends the same amount of money, nobody has to drive to school, fewer kids get hurt in car accidents, less traffic. Not sure what the problem is.

I'm a supporter of the school and this strikes me as a reasonable compromise. The issue, though, is that every expansion that DCPS has done recently has been full almost as soon as it was open. Hyde-Addison opened a third entire building in SY19-20 and has now cut PK3 entirely for SY22-23 because it has again run out of space. Opponents of the school (from Foxhall and Glover Park) like to claim that the school won't be filled, but that certainly hasn't been the recent experience with other nearby schools. Probably the best option is to build it in such a way that it can be reasonably quickly expanded if demand does materialize.

Every projection is based on existing behavior, because that's all you can base it on. But good schools are a draw, and people move to get into them.

Fair, so both predicted and actual population growth for kids was the highest in Glover Park. Glover Park actually wants the construction. Glover park isn't exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. Why aren't we just building a second school on the Stoddert footprint? If the Foxhall site can fit two schools, why can't that be true at Stoddert?

Yes, Glover Park isn’t exactly walkable to Foxhall for 7 year olds. And it’s also true that Foxhall isn’t exactly walkable to Glover Park for 7 years. And Key isn’t exactly walkable for 7 year olds in Foxhall either.

Why are people from Glover Park lobbying against a walkable elementary school for Foxhall kids while claiming that their having a walkable school is of utmost importance? Do you realize how these arguments look?

Foxhall families want their walkable elementary school construction as well.

There is also not a single site at Foxhall that will be getting two schools. Foxhall ES and MacArthur HS will be located at two different sites on two different blocks.

The problem is DCPS's proposal to build a walkable school in Foxhall by eliminating the walkable school for part of Glover Park.

For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION. The DCPS Chancellor spoke to the ANC that covers Glover Park last night and confirmed that DCPS has no such plans and will strive - as in all cases - to ensure that the opening of new schools doesn't result in families being assigned to schools that are further away than those their children currently attend.

I would characterize him as saying nothing at all regarding this. I wouldn't draw anything from him either way from that meeting.

Indeed. The Chancellor confirmed that DCPS has NO plans to "eliminat[e] the walkable school for part of Glover Park." None. Can people on here (and elsewhere) now please stop saying that DCPS has a plan to do this?

That is a tendentious misreading. The Chancellor claimed to have no plans either way, not your implication he has some plan that does not do this.

To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

The only evidence is that DCPS has always been completely and utterly cowardly when it comes to adjusting boundaries. If DCPS were willing to solve crowding by moving boundaries in a way that affected families are opposed to crowding would have been solved long ago. It's just not something they do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

What “evidence”? There was a single example map that was released by the CWG, not DCPS. Multiple CWG members have clarified that the boundaries on that map were not proposed to DCPS and are not realistic. Representing that single map as “DCPS plans” is a bald lie perpetuated by those with ulterior motives.

The problem is the Stoddert expansion isn't actually an expansion. The math simply doesn't work out unless the CWG map or a similar variant is used. If they had said they were added 100 instead of 20 seats at stoddert, I'd believe that stoddert kids would still all be able to walk to school.

The math also doesn't work out that money can be shifted from Foxhall to Stoddert to get the same number of seats for the same money. A smaller school is more expensive per seat. Renovation is more expensive than new construction.

It'd be new construction on stoddert where the trailers/forest is...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

What “evidence”? There was a single example map that was released by the CWG, not DCPS. Multiple CWG members have clarified that the boundaries on that map were not proposed to DCPS and are not realistic. Representing that single map as “DCPS plans” is a bald lie perpetuated by those with ulterior motives.

The problem is the Stoddert expansion isn't actually an expansion. The math simply doesn't work out unless the CWG map or a similar variant is used. If they had said they were added 100 instead of 20 seats at stoddert, I'd believe that stoddert kids would still all be able to walk to school.

Due to the grandfathering provisions, the effect of the 2019 changes to Stoddert's boundaries (https://www.stoddert.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Stoddert-ES-Boundary-Change-Letter_Feb-2019.pdf) are going to take a while to kick in, but will progressively reduce IB enrolments over the next few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To try to satisfy you, all other evidence is that DCPS plans to have such a plan.

What “evidence”? There was a single example map that was released by the CWG, not DCPS. Multiple CWG members have clarified that the boundaries on that map were not proposed to DCPS and are not realistic. Representing that single map as “DCPS plans” is a bald lie perpetuated by those with ulterior motives.

The problem is the Stoddert expansion isn't actually an expansion. The math simply doesn't work out unless the CWG map or a similar variant is used. If they had said they were added 100 instead of 20 seats at stoddert, I'd believe that stoddert kids would still all be able to walk to school.

Due to the grandfathering provisions, the effect of the 2019 changes to Stoddert's boundaries (https://www.stoddert.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Stoddert-ES-Boundary-Change-Letter_Feb-2019.pdf) are going to take a while to kick in, but will progressively reduce IB enrolments over the next few years.

That and the students from the Russian Embassy are not likely to return to Stoddert anytime soon.

[Anonymous]

How many of the candidates for DC Council for Ward 3 are shamelessly trawling for votes in NIMBY land?

Goulet gave “Save Hardy Park” a shout-out in a recent tweet so I guess he either believes the lies the FCCA is pushing or cares more about their votes than he does about the truth.

Frumin was pandering to them too it seems by floating some fanciful ideas about finding somewhere else to put the school.

Have any of the candidates straight up called Avery and co. out? If Ward 3 doesn’t elect a candidate who has the balls to stand up to nincompoops of this ilk, absolutely nothing is going to get done in the Ward for the next 4 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many of the candidates for DC Council for Ward 3 are shamelessly trawling for votes in NIMBY land?

Goulet gave “Save Hardy Park” a shout-out in a recent tweet so I guess he either believes the lies the FCCA is pushing or cares more about their votes than he does about the truth.

Frumin was pandering to them too it seems by floating some fanciful ideas about finding somewhere else to put the school.

Have any of the candidates straight up called Avery and co. out? If Ward 3 doesn’t elect a candidate who has the balls to stand up to nincompoops of this ilk, absolutely nothing is going to get done in the Ward for the next 4 years.

Frumin has raised the most money and Goulet got the wapo endorsement. The 4-5 'progressive' candidates are pretty much just diluting each others vote. My money is on the entire ES plan being scrapped. (The high school will probably still happen)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many of the candidates for DC Council for Ward 3 are shamelessly trawling for votes in NIMBY land?

Goulet gave “Save Hardy Park” a shout-out in a recent tweet so I guess he either believes the lies the FCCA is pushing or cares more about their votes than he does about the truth.

Frumin was pandering to them too it seems by floating some fanciful ideas about finding somewhere else to put the school.

Have any of the candidates straight up called Avery and co. out? If Ward 3 doesn’t elect a candidate who has the balls to stand up to nincompoops of this ilk, absolutely nothing is going to get done in the Ward for the next 4 years.

Frumin has raised the most money and Goulet got the wapo endorsement. The 4-5 'progressive' candidates are pretty much just diluting each others vote. My money is on the entire ES plan being scrapped. (The high school will probably still happen)

Frumin’s fundraising advantage is entirely due to money raised from people outside the ward. Tricia Duncan has more Ward 3 contributors.

The Post endorsement is worthless and may even backfire. Goulet is getting a lot of negative press as well for things he has said about housing voucher recipients.

But you are dead right about the progressive candidates diluting the vote. They need to figure it out and get behind one candidate. I don’t expect they will, though, egos being what they are.