FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t just to align 6th graders with middle school standards, curriculum, etc. It’s also to introduce universal pre-K into the elementary schools. They’re essentially adding on an entire new grade level’s worth of students. I assume they would have pre-K-4 for 4 year olds at first and then maybe expand to pre-K 3 within a few years. I don’t think it would be as large of a cohort as an elementary grade 1-12 because some parents would elect to stay at day cares for a better schedule with fewer holidays and breaks.

I’ll just take my kids’ school as an example, they have averaged around 75 Kindergarten students a year and this is generally a little smaller than 1-6, I’d assume due to kids going to private K or perhaps being homeschooled for a year. If half chose FCPS Pre-K as 4 year olds, that’s around 38 kids they have to find space for. You wouldn’t put 38 kids in one classroom, so you’d need 2 classrooms of 18-20. And a teacher for each class, and probably an assistant. When my younger kid was in the special needs preschool they ate lunch in their classrooms, so cafeteria space wasn’t affected. But they still got outdoor recess (at a special, self contained playground! Not every school has that unless they already have a preschool!), music, and library time. Multiply 38 kids times 141 elementary schools and you’re adding AT LEAST 5300 students to FCPS overnight. And that’s a conservative estimate just based on 4 year olds and based on half of parents continuing at day care/private pre K. The number would only increase as time went on and they fleshed out the programs some more.

To take this thought process a step further, how are they going to pay for that? They've already adopted a budget this year for teacher raises that they don't actually have the money for. They need the Board of Supervisors to increase the FCPS budget and it's not clear they're going to be able to do that. Especially now that we're seeing economic turmoil thanks to government worker and contractor layoffs.

I don't think you're wrong. They are 100 percent working to do all of this so they can add universal pre-K and be applauded by parents of young children everywhere. But Fairfax County doesn't have the money to do this and given what's happening with the local economy, they won't have the money to do this unless services are cut somewhere else. Do we cut fire and police department budgets? Cut the parks and libraries' budget?

The push for UPK is coming from Reid herself, the SB never mentioned it and still isn’t mentioning it. During one of his outreach meetings, Mateo Dunne didn’t mention the push for UPK and how it relates to 6th to Middle until directly asked by a meeting attendee. Reid wants to be the big savior introducing an expensive UPK program, but she and the board need to read the room about what’s going on nationally at the moment. Not to mention the governor’s race! I have to wonder if there will be any pressure from VA Dems to try to put the brakes on everything for a few months until after November?

UPK is very popular. And many families will view this as free childcare.

VA Dems have nothing to worry about.

FCPS can’t even get the money it wants to operate without UPK.

The Ds on the SB are basically reduced to random acts of virtue signaling when they’ve demonstrated no ability to live within their current means.

Exactly. Pointing you to this story from Fairfax Now on the FCPS budget: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/02/20/fcps-planning-for-the-worst-with-federal-aid-at-risk-and-limited-county-funding

"Even without the federal funding uncertainty, Fairfax County is struggling to close an estimated $292.7 million budget shortfall — the second year in a row it has faced a major financial gap.

Hill’s $5.7 billion budget proposal attempts to balance rising costs with slowing revenue growth, but it still required nearly $60 million in spending reductions, the most since fiscal year 2010.

To help bridge the shortfall, Hill has proposed:

A 1.5-cent real estate tax increase, adding $50.9 million in revenue but increasing the average homeowner’s tax bill by $638
Cutting 208 county positions and some programs, such as high school crossing guards, totaling $59.8 million
A 2% increase in the transient occupancy or hotel tax, expected to bring in $13 million
Additionally, Hill pointed out that home values continue to rise, giving the county $197.5 million in additional revenue at the current real estate tax rate.

A 3 or 4% food and beverage tax is also under consideration, though if approved, it would take effect in January 2026 instead of at the beginning of fiscal year 2026 on July 1. A 4% tax would generate $65.1 million over half a year, Hill estimated.

Even with these changes, McDaniel worries the county may be underestimating future financial pressures, particularly if federal funding cuts materialize or other county services require additional resources."

Why doesn't Fairfax county cut the minimum basic income program?

It costs millions of dollars to give people in certain Zip codes hundreds of no strings attached dollars each month?

[Anonymous]

I start to like the voucher program now. we will just take voucher, go to private. Then FCPS can do whatever they want with the boundary change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reid stated at a meeting tonight that rezoning is about manipulating space to move all the 6th grades to middle school.

That is a hill she isn't willing to give up.

She is using WSHS capacity as an excuse to move a WSHS feeder from Irving to Key so she can move 6th grade to middle school.

She was fairly emphatic at the meeting tonight that she will not budge on moving 6th to middle school.

“And you get a split feeder, and you get a split feeder…”

If she is so committed to this, I wish she’d layout how it could be accomplished. There are not enough middle school seats to add an extra grade. Many middle schools aren’t even designed to meet half of their expanded high school’s capacity. There’s no way this can be done without splitting pockets of schools every which way across the county to fill an empty seat.

If they’re going to convert elementary schools say it. And please, change Dunn Loring ES to Dunn Loring MS before it’s too late.

I have no issue with 6-8 middle school. This goal seems so short sighted though. It’s an enormous school district that has been designed and built around the 7-8 concept and recent middle school renovations have done nothing to work toward this goal.

I think that she plans to blow up the boundaries, bussing hundreds or thousands of kids out of their neighborhood schools to schools with capacity, not just to underperforming under enrolled schools like Lewis/Key but also making the secondary schools with space like SoCo, LB and Robinson into mega schools.

Using Irving as an example, the only way to accomkdate 6th grade in the school is to transfer out almost 600 students.

That is 2 elementary schools being affected by rezoning.

Does that mean West Springfield Elementary or keene Mill Elementary to Lewis/Key AND Hunt Valley to SoCo?

That might give enough space for 6th in middle school.

But then, the receiving schools will now be over capacity.

Does she only move one elementary school out of Irving/WSHS to Key/Lewis?

That means that Irving would have to rely heavily on trailers to accomodate 6th grade, as would every other middle school in the county.

What a mess.

I looked into this during the 8130 meetings and it was pretty obvious Key will be overcapacity as will Irving, if 6th moves to middle.

I think this is an insane idea. I was really happy that my 6th graders were in an elementary school.

When Reid said, “parents like having 6th graders in elementary, but…..” and trailed off it was clear she didn’t care about what any parents thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reid stated at a meeting tonight that rezoning is about manipulating space to move all the 6th grades to middle school.

That is a hill she isn't willing to give up.

She is using WSHS capacity as an excuse to move a WSHS feeder from Irving to Key so she can move 6th grade to middle school.

She was fairly emphatic at the meeting tonight that she will not budge on moving 6th to middle school.

“And you get a split feeder, and you get a split feeder…”

If she is so committed to this, I wish she’d layout how it could be accomplished. There are not enough middle school seats to add an extra grade. Many middle schools aren’t even designed to meet half of their expanded high school’s capacity. There’s no way this can be done without splitting pockets of schools every which way across the county to fill an empty seat.

If they’re going to convert elementary schools say it. And please, change Dunn Loring ES to Dunn Loring MS before it’s too late.

I have no issue with 6-8 middle school. This goal seems so short sighted though. It’s an enormous school district that has been designed and built around the 7-8 concept and recent middle school renovations have done nothing to work toward this goal.

I think that she plans to blow up the boundaries, bussing hundreds or thousands of kids out of their neighborhood schools to schools with capacity, not just to underperforming under enrolled schools like Lewis/Key but also making the secondary schools with space like SoCo, LB and Robinson into mega schools.

Using Irving as an example, the only way to accomkdate 6th grade in the school is to transfer out almost 600 students.

That is 2 elementary schools being affected by rezoning.

Does that mean West Springfield Elementary or keene Mill Elementary to Lewis/Key AND Hunt Valley to SoCo?

That might give enough space for 6th in middle school.

But then, the receiving schools will now be over capacity.

Does she only move one elementary school out of Irving/WSHS to Key/Lewis?

That means that Irving would have to rely heavily on trailers to accomodate 6th grade, as would every other middle school in the county.

What a mess.

I looked into this during the 8130 meetings and it was pretty obvious Key will be overcapacity as will Irving, if 6th moves to middle.

I think this is an insane idea. I was really happy that my 6th graders were in an elementary school.

When Reid said, “parents like having 6th graders in elementary, but…..” and trailed off it was clear she didn’t care about what any parents thought.

Reid lives on a different planet from the rest of us, one where “all things are possible” if only others would give FCPS the money it deserves, but will never receive.

[Anonymous]

Could someone explain Reid's vision for UPK. Is it full day? Half day? Everyday?
Certified teachers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t just to align 6th graders with middle school standards, curriculum, etc. It’s also to introduce universal pre-K into the elementary schools. They’re essentially adding on an entire new grade level’s worth of students. I assume they would have pre-K-4 for 4 year olds at first and then maybe expand to pre-K 3 within a few years. I don’t think it would be as large of a cohort as an elementary grade 1-12 because some parents would elect to stay at day cares for a better schedule with fewer holidays and breaks.

I’ll just take my kids’ school as an example, they have averaged around 75 Kindergarten students a year and this is generally a little smaller than 1-6, I’d assume due to kids going to private K or perhaps being homeschooled for a year. If half chose FCPS Pre-K as 4 year olds, that’s around 38 kids they have to find space for. You wouldn’t put 38 kids in one classroom, so you’d need 2 classrooms of 18-20. And a teacher for each class, and probably an assistant. When my younger kid was in the special needs preschool they ate lunch in their classrooms, so cafeteria space wasn’t affected. But they still got outdoor recess (at a special, self contained playground! Not every school has that unless they already have a preschool!), music, and library time. Multiply 38 kids times 141 elementary schools and you’re adding AT LEAST 5300 students to FCPS overnight. And that’s a conservative estimate just based on 4 year olds and based on half of parents continuing at day care/private pre K. The number would only increase as time went on and they fleshed out the programs some more.

To take this thought process a step further, how are they going to pay for that? They've already adopted a budget this year for teacher raises that they don't actually have the money for. They need the Board of Supervisors to increase the FCPS budget and it's not clear they're going to be able to do that. Especially now that we're seeing economic turmoil thanks to government worker and contractor layoffs.

I don't think you're wrong. They are 100 percent working to do all of this so they can add universal pre-K and be applauded by parents of young children everywhere. But Fairfax County doesn't have the money to do this and given what's happening with the local economy, they won't have the money to do this unless services are cut somewhere else. Do we cut fire and police department budgets? Cut the parks and libraries' budget?

The push for UPK is coming from Reid herself, the SB never mentioned it and still isn’t mentioning it. During one of his outreach meetings, Mateo Dunne didn’t mention the push for UPK and how it relates to 6th to Middle until directly asked by a meeting attendee. Reid wants to be the big savior introducing an expensive UPK program, but she and the board need to read the room about what’s going on nationally at the moment. Not to mention the governor’s race! I have to wonder if there will be any pressure from VA Dems to try to put the brakes on everything for a few months until after November?

UPK is very popular. And many families will view this as free childcare.

VA Dems have nothing to worry about.

FCPS can’t even get the money it wants to operate without UPK.

The Ds on the SB are basically reduced to random acts of virtue signaling when they’ve demonstrated no ability to live within their current means.

Exactly. Pointing you to this story from Fairfax Now on the FCPS budget: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/02/20/fcps-planning-for-the-worst-with-federal-aid-at-risk-and-limited-county-funding

"Even without the federal funding uncertainty, Fairfax County is struggling to close an estimated $292.7 million budget shortfall — the second year in a row it has faced a major financial gap.

Hill’s $5.7 billion budget proposal attempts to balance rising costs with slowing revenue growth, but it still required nearly $60 million in spending reductions, the most since fiscal year 2010.

To help bridge the shortfall, Hill has proposed:

A 1.5-cent real estate tax increase, adding $50.9 million in revenue but increasing the average homeowner’s tax bill by $638
Cutting 208 county positions and some programs, such as high school crossing guards, totaling $59.8 million
A 2% increase in the transient occupancy or hotel tax, expected to bring in $13 million
Additionally, Hill pointed out that home values continue to rise, giving the county $197.5 million in additional revenue at the current real estate tax rate.

A 3 or 4% food and beverage tax is also under consideration, though if approved, it would take effect in January 2026 instead of at the beginning of fiscal year 2026 on July 1. A 4% tax would generate $65.1 million over half a year, Hill estimated.

Even with these changes, McDaniel worries the county may be underestimating future financial pressures, particularly if federal funding cuts materialize or other county services require additional resources."

Let me get out the smallest F’ing violin I can to play for McDaniel and the rest of the school board who seek to implement grossly unpopular boundary changes over the objection of voters/parents/citizens and in the face of massive upheaval at the federal government level.

I would much rather be rallying to FCPS’s side through the budget issues, but instead I’m beyond mad at the clown show of the sb’s own making.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t just to align 6th graders with middle school standards, curriculum, etc. It’s also to introduce universal pre-K into the elementary schools. They’re essentially adding on an entire new grade level’s worth of students. I assume they would have pre-K-4 for 4 year olds at first and then maybe expand to pre-K 3 within a few years. I don’t think it would be as large of a cohort as an elementary grade 1-12 because some parents would elect to stay at day cares for a better schedule with fewer holidays and breaks.

I’ll just take my kids’ school as an example, they have averaged around 75 Kindergarten students a year and this is generally a little smaller than 1-6, I’d assume due to kids going to private K or perhaps being homeschooled for a year. If half chose FCPS Pre-K as 4 year olds, that’s around 38 kids they have to find space for. You wouldn’t put 38 kids in one classroom, so you’d need 2 classrooms of 18-20. And a teacher for each class, and probably an assistant. When my younger kid was in the special needs preschool they ate lunch in their classrooms, so cafeteria space wasn’t affected. But they still got outdoor recess (at a special, self contained playground! Not every school has that unless they already have a preschool!), music, and library time. Multiply 38 kids times 141 elementary schools and you’re adding AT LEAST 5300 students to FCPS overnight. And that’s a conservative estimate just based on 4 year olds and based on half of parents continuing at day care/private pre K. The number would only increase as time went on and they fleshed out the programs some more.

To take this thought process a step further, how are they going to pay for that? They've already adopted a budget this year for teacher raises that they don't actually have the money for. They need the Board of Supervisors to increase the FCPS budget and it's not clear they're going to be able to do that. Especially now that we're seeing economic turmoil thanks to government worker and contractor layoffs.

I don't think you're wrong. They are 100 percent working to do all of this so they can add universal pre-K and be applauded by parents of young children everywhere. But Fairfax County doesn't have the money to do this and given what's happening with the local economy, they won't have the money to do this unless services are cut somewhere else. Do we cut fire and police department budgets? Cut the parks and libraries' budget?

The push for UPK is coming from Reid herself, the SB never mentioned it and still isn’t mentioning it. During one of his outreach meetings, Mateo Dunne didn’t mention the push for UPK and how it relates to 6th to Middle until directly asked by a meeting attendee. Reid wants to be the big savior introducing an expensive UPK program, but she and the board need to read the room about what’s going on nationally at the moment. Not to mention the governor’s race! I have to wonder if there will be any pressure from VA Dems to try to put the brakes on everything for a few months until after November?

UPK is very popular. And many families will view this as free childcare.

VA Dems have nothing to worry about.

FCPS can’t even get the money it wants to operate without UPK.

The Ds on the SB are basically reduced to random acts of virtue signaling when they’ve demonstrated no ability to live within their current means.

Exactly. Pointing you to this story from Fairfax Now on the FCPS budget: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/02/20/fcps-planning-for-the-worst-with-federal-aid-at-risk-and-limited-county-funding

"Even without the federal funding uncertainty, Fairfax County is struggling to close an estimated $292.7 million budget shortfall — the second year in a row it has faced a major financial gap.

Hill’s $5.7 billion budget proposal attempts to balance rising costs with slowing revenue growth, but it still required nearly $60 million in spending reductions, the most since fiscal year 2010.

To help bridge the shortfall, Hill has proposed:

A 1.5-cent real estate tax increase, adding $50.9 million in revenue but increasing the average homeowner’s tax bill by $638
Cutting 208 county positions and some programs, such as high school crossing guards, totaling $59.8 million
A 2% increase in the transient occupancy or hotel tax, expected to bring in $13 million
Additionally, Hill pointed out that home values continue to rise, giving the county $197.5 million in additional revenue at the current real estate tax rate.

A 3 or 4% food and beverage tax is also under consideration, though if approved, it would take effect in January 2026 instead of at the beginning of fiscal year 2026 on July 1. A 4% tax would generate $65.1 million over half a year, Hill estimated.

Even with these changes, McDaniel worries the county may be underestimating future financial pressures, particularly if federal funding cuts materialize or other county services require additional resources."

Let me get out the smallest F’ing violin I can to play for McDaniel and the rest of the school board who seek to implement grossly unpopular boundary changes over the objection of voters/parents/citizens and in the face of massive upheaval at the federal government level.

I would much rather be rallying to FCPS’s side through the budget issues, but instead I’m beyond mad at the clown show of the sb’s own making.

Between the School Board and Reid they are doing just about everything they can to generate the minimum amount of sympathy for any budget shortfalls they encounter. They’ll be relegated to having the usual shills show up at board meetings to express their solidarity and their concurrence with everything FCPD is proposing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Could someone explain Reid's vision for UPK. Is it full day? Half day? Everyday?
Certified teachers?

No one knows 100% because IMO the SB and Reid are not on the same page about it at this time. But FCPS already has a pre-K program for 4 year olds at some schools, full day 5 days a week, for low income (a higher income threshold than free/reduced meals IIRC, so more families qualify) and kids with IEP’s. Some kids with IEP’s are still in the half day program and some are in PAC. There is bus transportation as well. A few kids in my neighborhood are in it at a different school than our neighborhood school since our neighborhood school doesn’t have a preschool. And then if you’re in the half day or PAC special needs classes, those go to another different school.

[Anonymous]

Sorry hit post too soon before I could finish my thoughts. So I think most of us assume it would be an extension of the current pre K program but open to everyone and not just kids with special needs and people under the income threshold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry hit post too soon before I could finish my thoughts. So I think most of us assume it would be an extension of the current pre K program but open to everyone and not just kids with special needs and people under the income threshold.

If we already have pre-K for kids with special needs and families who otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford it, why on earth is she pushing to have it everywhere? There are 1 million options for full day pre-K around here at varying price points. This is a highly educated area. I really can’t imagine there are families who can afford pre-K that just don’t bother with it. What problem is she trying to solve?Sounds like she’s creating one instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry hit post too soon before I could finish my thoughts. So I think most of us assume it would be an extension of the current pre K program but open to everyone and not just kids with special needs and people under the income threshold.

If we already have pre-K for kids with special needs and families who otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford it, why on earth is she pushing to have it everywhere? There are 1 million options for full day pre-K around here at varying price points. This is a highly educated area. I really can’t imagine there are families who can afford pre-K that just don’t bother with it. What problem is she trying to solve?Sounds like she’s creating one instead.

Also, I understand that some kids with special needs have long bus rides to their preschool programs. But I don’t see how that would be solved by having pre-K everywhere. Because it’s not like they can have regular and special needs preschool in every neighborhood. They’re still going to have to have programs for special needs at consolidated sites. I have a child with a disability who didn’t end up qualifying for the preschool program but if he had, it would’ve been a 45 minute bus ride. But it would make no sense to have the type of preschool that he would have needed in all different areas of the county because they’re just aren’t enough kids to fill the classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they're really doing to do this, then they rip it all up. Change every boundary for every neighborhood and every school. Start completely over. Convert some of the ES to MS because the current MS's aren't large enough to accomodate 6-8.

They said they want a holistic review of every boundary. If this is the direction they're heading, it's not just going to be the Langley and West Springfield communities complaining once those draft maps come out in June.

This is what's been stated the "AI Tool", Frontline GIS, will do being used by Thru Consulting. They will use a clean slate, plug in "the data" they've collected and completely redraw everything. Some of the most recent minutes have identified "natural boarders" like the beltway, 66, 50. If all this ES to MS efforts are true, this will be plugged now vs later. It's been mentioned that many of the SB members don't have kids in school anymore so what do they have to lose? Thru Consulting is not local to DC which removes neighborhood bias as well. If they are going to anger and have to deal with a few subsets, why not Big Bang it all at once? If they are willing to risk not getting re-elected over pockets of change, why not rip it all up?

On the October 8 work session, this is exactly what Thru said they would do.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i04W3vvtV4w

The rezoning discussion starts at 2:47.

Thru discusses the software around 3:34.

There is discussion around 3:31 that part of the process will be marketing the change to parents by convincing them that school rankings by Niche and Great Schools are flawed and that the new 3 rated schools they are rezoned to are actually "equal or better" quality than the 8 or 10 school they purchased a home in.

4:01 they discuss that the Equity Officer will be involved in the process to guarantee compliance with One Fairfax

4:05 they state EVERY high school pyramid will be rezoned

4:17 discuses diversity in the advisory committee

4:19 discusses how the special interest groups were already involved with advising rezoning before the brac was formed

4:25 They discuss how the rezoning software can isolate addresses by demographic for the purpose of rezoning.

4:31 Reid states the software they are using can chart any program (AAP, demographics, etc) down to the individual household address.

4:32 Discusses that the school board already accepted "The Plunker Report" regarding AAP centers, and now they just need to work the recommendations into the rezoning process.

3:36 Dixon asks why did Reid not include any role for the Chief ACADEMIC Officer in the rezoning process, since this will greatly affect academics. Reid responds that the Chief Academic Officer will be brought in eventually, during the BRAC meetings.

If you care about the rezoning process, watch the October 8, 2024 planning meeting to get informed.

Thanks for the time stamps - very helpful!

What is the Plunker Report, and what did it recommend for AAP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone explain Reid's vision for UPK. Is it full day? Half day? Everyday?
Certified teachers?

No one knows 100% because IMO the SB and Reid are not on the same page about it at this time. But FCPS already has a pre-K program for 4 year olds at some schools, full day 5 days a week, for low income (a higher income threshold than free/reduced meals IIRC, so more families qualify) and kids with IEP’s. Some kids with IEP’s are still in the half day program and some are in PAC. There is bus transportation as well. A few kids in my neighborhood are in it at a different school than our neighborhood school since our neighborhood school doesn’t have a preschool. And then if you’re in the half day or PAC special needs classes, those go to another different school.

It's unclear, however, if there will be funding for those programs moving forward, because a lot of that funding comes from the federal government. And it's just not clear how much of that they'll continue to do. FCPS could be facing a large budget hole to provide services to low incomes families if that funding get canceled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could someone explain Reid's vision for UPK. Is it full day? Half day? Everyday?
Certified teachers?

No one knows 100% because IMO the SB and Reid are not on the same page about it at this time. But FCPS already has a pre-K program for 4 year olds at some schools, full day 5 days a week, for low income (a higher income threshold than free/reduced meals IIRC, so more families qualify) and kids with IEP’s. Some kids with IEP’s are still in the half day program and some are in PAC. There is bus transportation as well. A few kids in my neighborhood are in it at a different school than our neighborhood school since our neighborhood school doesn’t have a preschool. And then if you’re in the half day or PAC special needs classes, those go to another different school.

It's unclear, however, if there will be funding for those programs moving forward, because a lot of that funding comes from the federal government. And it's just not clear how much of that they'll continue to do. FCPS could be facing a large budget hole to provide services to low incomes families if that funding get canceled.

They cut programs during the recession due to lack of funding so they’re going to have to cut back on some of these changes now, RIGHT?! Tax assessments are out and most people are going to get royally hosed - people are saying their assessments went up by $100k or more in one year!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they're really doing to do this, then they rip it all up. Change every boundary for every neighborhood and every school. Start completely over. Convert some of the ES to MS because the current MS's aren't large enough to accomodate 6-8.

They said they want a holistic review of every boundary. If this is the direction they're heading, it's not just going to be the Langley and West Springfield communities complaining once those draft maps come out in June.

This is what's been stated the "AI Tool", Frontline GIS, will do being used by Thru Consulting. They will use a clean slate, plug in "the data" they've collected and completely redraw everything. Some of the most recent minutes have identified "natural boarders" like the beltway, 66, 50. If all this ES to MS efforts are true, this will be plugged now vs later. It's been mentioned that many of the SB members don't have kids in school anymore so what do they have to lose? Thru Consulting is not local to DC which removes neighborhood bias as well. If they are going to anger and have to deal with a few subsets, why not Big Bang it all at once? If they are willing to risk not getting re-elected over pockets of change, why not rip it all up?

On the October 8 work session, this is exactly what Thru said they would do.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i04W3vvtV4w

The rezoning discussion starts at 2:47.

Thru discusses the software around 3:34.

There is discussion around 3:31 that part of the process will be marketing the change to parents by convincing them that school rankings by Niche and Great Schools are flawed and that the new 3 rated schools they are rezoned to are actually "equal or better" quality than the 8 or 10 school they purchased a home in.

4:01 they discuss that the Equity Officer will be involved in the process to guarantee compliance with One Fairfax

4:05 they state EVERY high school pyramid will be rezoned

4:17 discuses diversity in the advisory committee

4:19 discusses how the special interest groups were already involved with advising rezoning before the brac was formed

4:25 They discuss how the rezoning software can isolate addresses by demographic for the purpose of rezoning.

4:31 Reid states the software they are using can chart any program (AAP, demographics, etc) down to the individual household address.

4:32 Discusses that the school board already accepted "The Plunker Report" regarding AAP centers, and now they just need to work the recommendations into the rezoning process.

3:36 Dixon asks why did Reid not include any role for the Chief ACADEMIC Officer in the rezoning process, since this will greatly affect academics. Reid responds that the Chief Academic Officer will be brought in eventually, during the BRAC meetings.

If you care about the rezoning process, watch the October 8, 2024 planning meeting to get informed.

Thanks for the time stamps - very helpful!

What is the Plunker Report, and what did it recommend for AAP?

I have no idea.

I follow a lot of school board things, and have never heard of it.

But they were talking about "The Plunker Report" in relation to AAP and rezoning, as something that was a done deal.