FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:<<<Now, everyone is in a fighting mood, so even sensible changes that would have been welcomed by the affected families 2 years ago, such sending all of Sangster to Lake Braddock, now is getting angry pushback and organized resistance.>>>


I am the poster above and we do not want to go to be rezoned LBSS. I t is a fantastic school, but it does not change the fact that there are several reasons we want to stay in our current pyramid That is our main sticking point. SA even said in our meeting, Sangster sits in the WSHS boundary and we are the homes closest to Sangster. They said they are only looking to eliminate split feeders under 25% and we are 29%. A conversation dozens of pages back discussed distance to WSHS and LBSS, and how we are a group that is closer to WSHS anyway.

SA kept saying how families don't want split feeders and that is the main reason for eliminating them- and we are a group several hundred homes strong saying we absolutely do not mind them, so why change? I know not everyone in our neighborhood agrees, but enough do that we are really fighting to stay put.

Sending all of Sangster to LB (with generous grandfathering) makes the most sense.

LB is much closer to that neighborhood than Irving, and almost the exact same distance as WSHS, so there will actually be transportation savings from this move from cutting the middle school commute in half.

Sangster is a split feeder. This will close the split feeder.

Lake Braddock and WSHS are equivalent schools, with similar quality, outcome, student body, military community, facilities, etc. They overlap significantly with scouts, sports, church and community groups.

Housing values won't change. They might even go up.

The Gamelord and Reservation neighborhoods are actually the closest part of Sangster to Lake Braddock. They would have the shortest commute of all of the Sangster neighborhoods to Lake Bradfock, which somewhat nulifies any transportation arguments against rezoning.

With extensive grandfathering of 6th-12th graders, closing the Sangster split feeder and sending 100% of Sangster to Lake Braddock would be a seamless, relatively painless process that actually benefits those students instead of hurting them and makes sense for the district and the community.

If this has been proposed a couple of years ago, before all the controversy of 8130 and Thru got everyone so worked up, it would not hsve been met with the resistance that is happening now.

That being said, before FCPS rezones any of WSHS, they nedd to do a full residency check of that school.

They have had kids as far away as Robinson, South County and Lewis/Saratoga attending the school under false addresses, along with other Lewis zoned neighborhoods closer to the mixing bowl and from the Lewis neighborhoods along the parkway. There is not an insignificant number of out of zone students attending WSHS.

Before FCPS displaces current WSHS families, they need to prove that they aren't rezoning them to accomodate out of zone kids using false addresses who shouldn't be there to begin with.

They should also check Edison … the best HS in Prince George’s County.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

Trying to make fetch happen. 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:<<<Now, everyone is in a fighting mood, so even sensible changes that would have been welcomed by the affected families 2 years ago, such sending all of Sangster to Lake Braddock, now is getting angry pushback and organized resistance.>>>


I am the poster above and we do not want to go to be rezoned LBSS. I t is a fantastic school, but it does not change the fact that there are several reasons we want to stay in our current pyramid That is our main sticking point. SA even said in our meeting, Sangster sits in the WSHS boundary and we are the homes closest to Sangster. They said they are only looking to eliminate split feeders under 25% and we are 29%. A conversation dozens of pages back discussed distance to WSHS and LBSS, and how we are a group that is closer to WSHS anyway.

SA kept saying how families don't want split feeders and that is the main reason for eliminating them- and we are a group several hundred homes strong saying we absolutely do not mind them, so why change? I know not everyone in our neighborhood agrees, but enough do that we are really fighting to stay put.

Sending all of Sangster to LB (with generous grandfathering) makes the most sense.

LB is much closer to that neighborhood than Irving, and almost the exact same distance as WSHS, so there will actually be transportation savings from this move from cutting the middle school commute in half.

Sangster is a split feeder. This will close the split feeder.

Lake Braddock and WSHS are equivalent schools, with similar quality, outcome, student body, military community, facilities, etc. They overlap significantly with scouts, sports, church and community groups.

Housing values won't change. They might even go up.

The Gamelord and Reservation neighborhoods are actually the closest part of Sangster to Lake Braddock. They would have the shortest commute of all of the Sangster neighborhoods to Lake Bradfock, which somewhat nulifies any transportation arguments against rezoning.

With extensive grandfathering of 6th-12th graders, closing the Sangster split feeder and sending 100% of Sangster to Lake Braddock would be a seamless, relatively painless process that actually benefits those students instead of hurting them and makes sense for the district and the community.

If this has been proposed a couple of years ago, before all the controversy of 8130 and Thru got everyone so worked up, it would not hsve been met with the resistance that is happening now.

That being said, before FCPS rezones any of WSHS, they nedd to do a full residency check of that school.

They have had kids as far away as Robinson, South County and Lewis/Saratoga attending the school under false addresses, along with other Lewis zoned neighborhoods closer to the mixing bowl and from the Lewis neighborhoods along the parkway. There is not an insignificant number of out of zone students attending WSHS.

Before FCPS displaces current WSHS families, they need to prove that they aren't rezoning them to accomodate out of zone kids using false addresses who shouldn't be there to begin with.

I agree with this, and find a way to make languages accessible to students at all schools in order to close language transfers. From what I’ve seen, students are using this more as a reason to transfer schools vs actually having an interest in learning one language over others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:<<<Now, everyone is in a fighting mood, so even sensible changes that would have been welcomed by the affected families 2 years ago, such sending all of Sangster to Lake Braddock, now is getting angry pushback and organized resistance.>>>


I am the poster above and we do not want to go to be rezoned LBSS. I t is a fantastic school, but it does not change the fact that there are several reasons we want to stay in our current pyramid That is our main sticking point. SA even said in our meeting, Sangster sits in the WSHS boundary and we are the homes closest to Sangster. They said they are only looking to eliminate split feeders under 25% and we are 29%. A conversation dozens of pages back discussed distance to WSHS and LBSS, and how we are a group that is closer to WSHS anyway.

SA kept saying how families don't want split feeders and that is the main reason for eliminating them- and we are a group several hundred homes strong saying we absolutely do not mind them, so why change? I know not everyone in our neighborhood agrees, but enough do that we are really fighting to stay put.

Sending all of Sangster to LB (with generous grandfathering) makes the most sense.

LB is much closer to that neighborhood than Irving, and almost the exact same distance as WSHS, so there will actually be transportation savings from this move from cutting the middle school commute in half.

Sangster is a split feeder. This will close the split feeder.

Lake Braddock and WSHS are equivalent schools, with similar quality, outcome, student body, military community, facilities, etc. They overlap significantly with scouts, sports, church and community groups.

Housing values won't change. They might even go up.

The Gamelord and Reservation neighborhoods are actually the closest part of Sangster to Lake Braddock. They would have the shortest commute of all of the Sangster neighborhoods to Lake Bradfock, which somewhat nulifies any transportation arguments against rezoning.

With extensive grandfathering of 6th-12th graders, closing the Sangster split feeder and sending 100% of Sangster to Lake Braddock would be a seamless, relatively painless process that actually benefits those students instead of hurting them and makes sense for the district and the community.

If this has been proposed a couple of years ago, before all the controversy of 8130 and Thru got everyone so worked up, it would not hsve been met with the resistance that is happening now.

That being said, before FCPS rezones any of WSHS, they nedd to do a full residency check of that school.

They have had kids as far away as Robinson, South County and Lewis/Saratoga attending the school under false addresses, along with other Lewis zoned neighborhoods closer to the mixing bowl and from the Lewis neighborhoods along the parkway. There is not an insignificant number of out of zone students attending WSHS.

Before FCPS displaces current WSHS families, they need to prove that they aren't rezoning them to accomodate out of zone kids using false addresses who shouldn't be there to begin with.

FCPS needs to be doing residency checks at every single high school. Preferably at the ES and MS levels too, but HS is especially bad. Parents have been asking for this. Teachers have been asking for this. It's come up at School Board meetings, STAC, and PTA meetings. It's apparent Dr. Reid does not care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

You need to accept that people will come here to discuss the potential impact of the deal that just got announced on the boundary review.

If that bothers you perhaps you should avoid the Internet, or at least this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

You need to accept that people will come here to discuss the potential impact of the deal that just got announced on the boundary review.

If that bothers you perhaps you should avoid the Internet, or at least this forum.

Happy to discuss with sane people, not the Langley-hater obsessed though. It really bothers me that you keep putting down Herndon High pyramid kids, who have done nothing to draw your ire.

You continue to put down Herndon high in your quest to convince people that western gf should be moved. Please stop doing that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

You need to accept that people will come here to discuss the potential impact of the deal that just got announced on the boundary review.

If that bothers you perhaps you should avoid the Internet, or at least this forum.

Happy to discuss with sane people, not the Langley-hater obsessed though. It really bothers me that you keep putting down Herndon High pyramid kids, who have done nothing to draw your ire.

You continue to put down Herndon high in your quest to convince people that western gf should be moved. Please stop doing that.

DP here. We live in the Herndon Pyramid. I am not sure all of Western Great Falls should be moved to Herndon, but by God, if you have a Herndon address, Herndon zip code and live 3 miles from the high school (as in south of Route 7) how can you justify remaining in the Langley Pyramid? We know it is about real estate value and trying to stay with your own kind (income-wise). UMC smart kids do well at Herndon too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

You need to accept that people will come here to discuss the potential impact of the deal that just got announced on the boundary review.

If that bothers you perhaps you should avoid the Internet, or at least this forum.

Happy to discuss with sane people, not the Langley-hater obsessed though. It really bothers me that you keep putting down Herndon High pyramid kids, who have done nothing to draw your ire.

You continue to put down Herndon high in your quest to convince people that western gf should be moved. Please stop doing that.

You're conflating posters and your argument is convoluted.

The bottom line is that the KAA acquisition is going to result in further scrutiny of boundaries in western Fairfax that you hoped to avoid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

You need to accept that people will come here to discuss the potential impact of the deal that just got announced on the boundary review.

If that bothers you perhaps you should avoid the Internet, or at least this forum.

Happy to discuss with sane people, not the Langley-hater obsessed though. It really bothers me that you keep putting down Herndon High pyramid kids, who have done nothing to draw your ire.

You continue to put down Herndon high in your quest to convince people that western gf should be moved. Please stop doing that.

You're conflating posters and your argument is convoluted.

The bottom line is that the KAA acquisition is going to result in further scrutiny of boundaries in western Fairfax that you hoped to avoid.

I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

You need to accept that people will come here to discuss the potential impact of the deal that just got announced on the boundary review.

If that bothers you perhaps you should avoid the Internet, or at least this forum.

Happy to discuss with sane people, not the Langley-hater obsessed though. It really bothers me that you keep putting down Herndon High pyramid kids, who have done nothing to draw your ire.

You continue to put down Herndon high in your quest to convince people that western gf should be moved. Please stop doing that.

You're conflating posters and your argument is convoluted.

The bottom line is that the KAA acquisition is going to result in further scrutiny of boundaries in western Fairfax that you hoped to avoid.

You keep disparaging Herndon while arguing that Langley should be moved there. Stop it. It’s gross and super transparent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

There was a School Board work session yesterday and the acquisition of the KAA site only got passing reference.

I think Thru will adjust its proposals at least once more this summer without regard to the KAA acquisition, and then perhaps have an updated scenario this fall that takes the KAA site acquisition into account.

If part of your justification for buying this site and opening the new school is to relieve kids from their 8-10 mile commutes to Oakton, it gets increasingly difficult to leave boundaries in place that have Great Falls kids traveling 10 or more miles to Langley.

Of course that's why Great Falls is unhappy about this purchase and raising questions about process and transparency. It gives FCPS another bite at the apple when they thought they were safe. If it was families from Oakton or Chantilly getting rezoned to schools they didn't want to attend, they'd be just as unhappy and vocal.

Again, trying to make fetch happen. How many hours a day do you spend seething about the neighborhood to your north?

You need to accept that people will come here to discuss the potential impact of the deal that just got announced on the boundary review.

If that bothers you perhaps you should avoid the Internet, or at least this forum.

Happy to discuss with sane people, not the Langley-hater obsessed though. It really bothers me that you keep putting down Herndon High pyramid kids, who have done nothing to draw your ire.

You continue to put down Herndon high in your quest to convince people that western gf should be moved. Please stop doing that.

You're conflating posters and your argument is convoluted.

The bottom line is that the KAA acquisition is going to result in further scrutiny of boundaries in western Fairfax that you hoped to avoid.

You keep disparaging Herndon while arguing that Langley should be moved there. Stop it. It’s gross and super transparent.

I guess you missed the part about confliating posters. I haven't disparaged Herndon.

However, from what I've observed, Great Falls posters alternate between disparaging Herndon and saying Herndon's fine but they just want to stay at Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone watching the work session hear that at the BRAC meeting on Monday they will be reviewing NEW maps based on feedback?

I don’t think that was the original agenda so someone is definitely changing things up- gotta stay on top of it this summer.

On June 23 the BRAC will review REFINED scenarios.

Ricardy Anderson newsletter dated June 10, 2025 provides-
The Superintendent’s Boundary Review Advisory Committee (BRAC) will review refined scenarios and provide feedback on behalf of our community during their next few meetings. Share feedback with your pyramid BRAC representative.

So they are going to provide new maps based on the community feedback/outrage from May? Will they incorporate new divisions with the western high school purchase?

I know we all feel constantly dragged and on-edge about final proposals.

Yes. According to their posted timeline, they are doing “phase 2 data analysis and scenario updates”. Hopefully those minutes will be posted as the others have.

As for the western high school purchase, that’s a complete bomb thrown into this already-in-motion-process. Seems western Langley could be in jeopardy again.

FCPS found their new “nuclear option” in the 11th hour with this purchase since some of the equity push had to be downplayed.