FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[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:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

How does a parent whose child is not in aap go about choosing aap?

[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:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

PP this poster (or a small group of posters) hates AAP and will take every opportunity to bash it. Most likely sour grapes.

[Anonymous]

So the logic here seems to be: If you don't like the disruption associated with boundary changes, you shouldn't like the fact that AAP is also disruptive because it gives some kids an option to attend an AAP center that may also be a different school.

Still think this belongs in a different thread/forum, but one obvious difference is that boundary changes are imposed on an entire community, whereas AAP gives some people an option they would not otherwise have.

It feels like PP wants to punish families whose kids may be in AAP with boundary changes, but the irony is that if they make a lot of boundary changes in the next couple of years based on the current AAP center model at the ES and MS level, they would appear to be locking into that model for years to come. For example, if they make recommendations about Carson's and Franklin's future boundaries based on the assumption that Carson will continue to have approximately 300 transfers for AAP and Franklin will continue to have approximately 300 kids transferring out, that would appear to lock them into the current AAP model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

How does a parent whose child is not in aap go about choosing aap?

Uour lid has to qualify, of course.

But if they qualify and you think that AAP tears friend groups apart, then just stay at the base school.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand people who are upset about AAP months or years after the fact.

Holding that kind of grudge and fixation over AAP cannot be good for their kids.

[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:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

Unless their base school IS the center school, and that center school feeds the AAP kids to an entirely different middle school that their non-AAP counterparts. See also the Carson/Franklin comment mentioned above. I agree that this is not a reason to change every border in the entire county, but to claim that this something that can easily be avoided is just not based on facts.

[Anonymous]

Oddly enough the poster who clearly hates AAP so much and wants to tank it...has ended up derailing a thread that covers the entire county to talk about AAP.

[Anonymous]

Just want to remind everyone that a “comprehensive review” every 5 years is not the same as a “rezoning” every 5 years 🙄

[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:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

AAP is another way for parents to escape the poor, ESL children - at least in certain schools. Let's not forget that.

Overall, it is a bloated mess and goes well beyond the need to serve the truly gifted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just want to remind everyone that a “comprehensive review” every 5 years is not the same as a “rezoning” every 5 years 🙄

You can’t say that definitively. Fairfax families can only hope that the school board takes pity on them. 🙄

[Anonymous]

Related, read was not a bidding process to give the contract to ThruConsulting. Given how contentious the boundary issue is, would have thought FcPS would have wanted to be super clean on who does study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

Unless their base school IS the center school, and that center school feeds the AAP kids to an entirely different middle school that their non-AAP counterparts. See also the Carson/Franklin comment mentioned above. I agree that this is not a reason to change every border in the entire county, but to claim that this something that can easily be avoided is just not based on facts.

It’s all being considered together, right? I guess I assumed that. Start times for middle school, boundary adjustments, AAP centers, 6th in MS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

Unless their base school IS the center school, and that center school feeds the AAP kids to an entirely different middle school that their non-AAP counterparts. See also the Carson/Franklin comment mentioned above. I agree that this is not a reason to change every border in the entire county, but to claim that this something that can easily be avoided is just not based on facts.

It’s all being considered together, right? I guess I assumed that. Start times for middle school, boundary adjustments, AAP centers, 6th in MS?

That would be asking an awful lot of outside consultants with no prior familiarity with FCPS, wouldn’t it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

Unless their base school IS the center school, and that center school feeds the AAP kids to an entirely different middle school that their non-AAP counterparts. See also the Carson/Franklin comment mentioned above. I agree that this is not a reason to change every border in the entire county, but to claim that this something that can easily be avoided is just not based on facts.

It’s all being considered together, right? I guess I assumed that. Start times for middle school, boundary adjustments, AAP centers, 6th in MS?

That would be asking an awful lot of outside consultants with no prior familiarity with FCPS, wouldn’t it?

Then why are we paying the no bid contractor hundreds of thousands of dollars? Thru can’t walk and chew gum at the same time? Why did Reid pick it then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anyway, it will be the board dictating, not your neighbors but good on you for volunteering. Someone has to serve as checkbox for “community engagement.”

NP. So you'd rather complain on an anonymous board than actually do something? Got it.

The PP is the attitude of all the FCPS employees who hate FCPS but who hate parents even more. There are lots of them and they are chronically online.

Well, we had Ricardy Anderson complaining yesterday about the "squeaky wheels" in the community and the new consultant essentially saying the survey results from the work of the prior consultant (in which there was strong opposition to boundary changes) can be disregarded because the respondents weren't sufficiently representative.

The consistent message from the School Board is to shut up and just rely on them to channel the wishes of the community, although all the evidence from the past is that they act in their own interests and ignore the interests of others.

If you went door-to-door in disadvantaged communities and asked families if they'd like their kids to attend successful, safe schools with hundreds of opportunities in academic clubs, activities, and sports, I guarantee you they'd be fully on board.

But your side wants to dismiss their thoughts. Just because they don't answer email surveys and don't have the luxury of a 9-to-5 office gig with time to attend evening community meetings, doesn't mean their "culture" devalues education of their children.

Not sure what to make of this. Are you contending this doesn’t describe the schools for which these families are currently zoned? And, if so, why would it surprise you if others don’t want to be reassigned to those schools?

I’m all for additional outreach, but less in favor of transparently leading questions or School Board members purporting to speak for “those who aren’t being heard” when it’s really just a pretext to impose their own preferences on everyone else.

Yeah, is the prior poster admitting that the school board is wasting taxpayer money on these surveys?

If she just wants to pretend that the public’s overwhelming opposition to boundary changes doesn’t matter, then why do the school board members continually harp on how extensive public outreach will be?

“Overwhelming opposition” from who exactly (besides the FairFacts Matters folks)? Because the voters seem to overwhelmingly support the school board leadership. Also, how can you oppose a plan that hasn’t been developed yet?

The school board has been wholly inconsistent in the rationale for the boundary changes, and we all know why. Board members can’t say the real reason why they want to change boundaries, because that result in a lawsuit, so they’re stuck arguing for these supposed transportation cost savings (with any grandfathering savings will be negative), or sleep time for high schoolers (could they come up with a more spacious paternalistic rationale? Probably not).

Fairfax families are overwhelmingly against changes that will split friends groups and cause turmoil across the county. Ask yourself why the school board is hell bent on getting this done by fall of 2026 not fall of 2027.

And many are in favor of reviewing the borders to alleviate the split feeders and attendance islands that have gotten out of hand, so that their children’s friend groups aren’t split up every few years.

Also, it's ok to split up friend groups every year for every 3rd grader in the county for AAP?

AAP is popular and something people have the opportunity to choose. If they don't want to leave their friends, they can remain at the base school.

Rezoning every 5 years to push One Fairfax is controversial and unwanted.

Unless their base school IS the center school, and that center school feeds the AAP kids to an entirely different middle school that their non-AAP counterparts. See also the Carson/Franklin comment mentioned above. I agree that this is not a reason to change every border in the entire county, but to claim that this something that can easily be avoided is just not based on facts.

It’s all being considered together, right? I guess I assumed that. Start times for middle school, boundary adjustments, AAP centers, 6th in MS?

That would be asking an awful lot of outside consultants with no prior familiarity with FCPS, wouldn’t it?

Then why are we paying the no bid contractor hundreds of thousands of dollars? Thru can’t walk and chew gum at the same time? Why did Reid pick it then?

Just coming up with recommended county-wide boundary adjustments based on current forecasts and academic programs is no small task.

If you empower third-party consultants to make decisions about phasing out AAP centers, eliminating IB, or relocating Academy programs, that’s a much larger delegation of responsibility and it makes the consulting firm’s work more complex.