APS elementary planning initiative called off

[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That will mean the boundaries to be implemented for 2021 will be based on projections that are three years out of date at that point.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.

If they move ATS to NW, they need to designate a certain number of seats for ED students beyond those for VPI students. I know that would hurt UMCs from SA because they'd be competing against more people for even fewer seats, but it's the only way to make it remotely diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Old PTA had two Cherrydale officers, no Rosslyn officers.
New PTA has no Cherrydale officers, one Rosslyn officers.

Rest are from LV & Clarendon I think - not sure where everyone lives.

Most likely for fall 2019: move out any PUs that wouldn't be in the new "Key" and/or new "ASFS" zone. Very few PUs would be affected IMO.

It can't really be fixed until Key is a neighborhood.

Old PTA had two Cherrydale officers, no Rosslyn officers = factually incorrect

1 Rosslyn or 3 Cherrydale?

[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.

If they move ATS to NW, they need to designate a certain number of seats for ED students beyond those for VPI students. I know that would hurt UMCs from SA because they'd be competing against more people for even fewer seats, but it's the only way to make it remotely diverse.

If APS would enter into a social contract with Arlington families, agreeing to let no school rise above 50% poverty with every boundary redraw, I think many in south would understand holding choice slots of ED students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

Right right. All the other schools with shirts were just fine but the yellow shirt folks were insufferable. Since you were there how many yellow shirt people were there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

Right right. All the other schools with shirts were just fine but the yellow shirt folks were insufferable. Since you were there how many yellow shirt people were there?

We we happy deride the Henry to Fleet shirts. SB should just consider facts, not silk screened posses.

But to Henry credit, their goal was to keep the school together. The ASFS yellow shirts just didn’t want to lose their building and include the walk zone, and don’t speak to keeping community together

[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.

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/

Never said there weren’t yellow T-shirts. Only contesting your twisting of facts. Not a single person there that night from any school said a thing about rosslyn. Busing anyone to Taylor. This is just sick fabrication from a few crazies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

Right right. All the other schools with shirts were just fine but the yellow shirt folks were insufferable. Since you were there how many yellow shirt people were there?

We we happy deride the Henry to Fleet shirts. SB should just consider facts, not silk screened posses.

But to Henry credit, their goal was to keep the school together. The ASFS yellow shirts just didn’t want to lose their building and include the walk zone, and don’t speak to keeping community together

Your right. Too much bad blood at the school now. I’ll be happy when you leave.

[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/

"*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.

Sorry to lazy to make a hyperlink. But thanks for substantive contribution to discussion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

Right right. All the other schools with shirts were just fine but the yellow shirt folks were insufferable. Since you were there how many yellow shirt people were there?

We we happy deride the Henry to Fleet shirts. SB should just consider facts, not silk screened posses.

But to Henry credit, their goal was to keep the school together. The ASFS yellow shirts just didn’t want to lose their building and include the walk zone, and don’t speak to keeping community together

Get over yourself. By your logic, no boundaries should ever be redrawn anywhere because it would mean removing someone from a community. If that’s the best argument you have, maybe rezoning ASFS really is the right thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Who are the yellow shirts???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who are the yellow shirts???

The race leader in the Tour de France

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

Right right. All the other schools with shirts were just fine but the yellow shirt folks were insufferable. Since you were there how many yellow shirt people were there?

We we happy deride the Henry to Fleet shirts. SB should just consider facts, not silk screened posses.

But to Henry credit, their goal was to keep the school together. The ASFS yellow shirts just didn’t want to lose their building and include the walk zone, and don’t speak to keeping community together

Get over yourself. By your logic, no boundaries should ever be redrawn anywhere because it would mean removing someone from a community. If that’s the best argument you have, maybe rezoning ASFS really is the right thing to do.

It wasn’t about rezoning per se, it’s about subjecting an entire neighborhood to the longest non-option bus ride just so you can get your walkzone NOW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are the yellow shirts???

The race leader in the Tour de France

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

Right right. All the other schools with shirts were just fine but the yellow shirt folks were insufferable. Since you were there how many yellow shirt people were there?

We we happy deride the Henry to Fleet shirts. SB should just consider facts, not silk screened posses.

But to Henry credit, their goal was to keep the school together. The ASFS yellow shirts just didn’t want to lose their building and include the walk zone, and don’t speak to keeping community together

Get over yourself. By your logic, no boundaries should ever be redrawn anywhere because it would mean removing someone from a community. If that’s the best argument you have, maybe rezoning ASFS really is the right thing to do.

It wasn’t about rezoning per se, it’s about subjecting an entire neighborhood to the longest non-option bus ride just so you can get your walkzone NOW.

As opposed to when? When do you think ASFS should get a walkzone just like every other neighborhood school has? Someone has to have the longest ride, why are your children too precious for it? Are they just not as capable of coping as the kids at the eastern side of the Ashlawn zone? The northern end of the Abingdon zone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was at that meeting. Those yellow shirts were insufferable.

Right right. All the other schools with shirts were just fine but the yellow shirt folks were insufferable. Since you were there how many yellow shirt people were there?

I think we all agree matching shirts=jackasses

If you look at the video, you can see the following asfs staff wearing yellow shirts in the audience:
— the school registrar
— the gym teacher
— the science teacher
— another person who works in the front office
Along with two now former pta officers and their spouses.

The staff getting involved along with the pta weirdness is what lit the match on asfs. Keep in mind those were custom printed shirts, it would have taken weeks to coordinate that.