Tired of Name Changes/Bad Planning - Vote NO on School Bonds

[Anonymous]

If FCPS and the School Board were responsible and really committed to community engagement, that's the dialogue they would encourage. Do we want more schools with over 2500 students? Are we prepared to have some students in trailers longer if we build a new school? How important is it to make full use of schools with extra capacity like Mount Vernon and Lee? What disparities, in terms of class sizes, are appropriate between schools in high ESOL/FARMS areas and those in wealthier areas? Should we keep spending money busing kids to AAP centers and TJHSST? Is IB worth the extra costs?

None of these questions really are discussed openly, either among School Board members or with the public. You end up with a system that caters only to special interests, and the middle gets the declining share of what's left, at least until they flee for Loudoun.

+1 Yes. And the administration pads its own compensation (higher salaries and supplemental pensions) and unnecessary/ineffective programs linger and Auditors are let go or leashed and contracts go to preferred parties (such a Chairwoman Strauss' campaign manager or the Superintendents next employer) and the general public loses faith in the competence and integrity of the board and the Meals Tax is rejected and Capital Bond referendums become political footballs. FCPS could be world-class, but it won't be without some real commitment to principled governance.

[Anonymous]

15:26, well said.

I'm voting for YOU! I like your common sense approach!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the School Board devoted countless hours to debsting the Stuart renaming

"Countless?" Come on. Do you know how many board meetings, committee meetings, working groups, and other sessions this year had nothing to do with the name change? See for yourself: http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AAZFYB3D3E83. It took up a tiny fraction of the board's and staff's time.

Anonymous wrote:(with multiple Board members claiming it was the single most difficult issue they had ever encountered during their years on the Board)

Of course it was! On one side, you had proponents making the seemingly indisputable point that public spaces shouldn't be named after traitors. On the other were a clump of opponents with a bizarre fixation on keeping that traitor's namesake.

Anonymous wrote:This is not cutting one's nose to spite one's face

That's exactly what it is! You want to deny the school system hundreds of millions of dollars in funding because you didn't like that Stuart got renamed. Just be honest about it.

Lying repeatedly won't make your arguments any better.

School Board members and FCPS staff are on the record as saying the Stuart name change took a lot of their time and energy.

Conversely, they rubber-stamped capital spending proposals that deserved far more scrutiny.

As for Stuart, it's clear the School Board did the bidding of the NAACP and a very small number of "Changers" in cahoots with them and Evans.

I'd still probably vote against this bond package even if the mishandling of the Stuart renaming wasn't taking place simultaneously, but it seals the deal. They don't deserve more money.

The capital spending proposal was rubber stamped because there were no really vocal objectors. I assure you, if you had organized like the two sides of the Stuart debate, you would have been heard. If the SB doesn't get vocal push back, they assume we are ok with what they are doing.

Agree this is what happened however people come out whenever there is a clear threat to them and often for highly publicized issues and issues that involve specific minority groups. That's why general ed has such a hard time mobilizing. Everyone thinks someone else will handle. If the school board wants to spend less time with partisan supporters they should start focusing on some more mundane issues.

If FCPS and the School Board were responsible and really committed to community engagement, that's the dialogue they would encourage. Do we want more schools with over 2500 students? Are we prepared to have some students in trailers longer if we build a new school? How important is it to make full use of schools with extra capacity like Mount Vernon and Lee? What disparities, in terms of class sizes, are appropriate between schools in high ESOL/FARMS areas and those in wealthier areas? Should we keep spending money busing kids to AAP centers and TJHSST? Is IB worth the extra costs?

None of these questions really are discussed openly, either among School Board members or with the public. You end up with a system that caters only to special interests, and the middle gets the declining share of what's left, at least until they flee for Loudoun.

+1,000,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS and the School Board were responsible and really committed to community engagement, that's the dialogue they would encourage. Do we want more schools with over 2500 students? Are we prepared to have some students in trailers longer if we build a new school? How important is it to make full use of schools with extra capacity like Mount Vernon and Lee? What disparities, in terms of class sizes, are appropriate between schools in high ESOL/FARMS areas and those in wealthier areas? Should we keep spending money busing kids to AAP centers and TJHSST? Is IB worth the extra costs?

None of these questions really are discussed openly, either among School Board members or with the public. You end up with a system that caters only to special interests, and the middle gets the declining share of what's left, at least until they flee for Loudoun.

Voting against the bond would do nothing to foster community engagement or address the issues you mention. Quite the opposite: voting it down would worsen the very capacity problems you claim to be concerned about.

You say "[n]one of these questions really are discussed openly." Where are you getting that from? How many school board meetings, staff meetings, and working groups do you attend? How many times have you actually raised your questions with the board and the staff? What examples can you point to of the community organizing on one of those questions and bringing their concerns to the board, only to be dismissed? Of course they're paying attention to these things. You might not like what they're doing about them, and they may even be doing the wrong thing. But their handling of those issues has nothing to do with renaming Stuart, and I have yet to see any evidence otherwise. Public comments like "it took up a lot of our time" and "it was a tough choice" don't actually imply that other agenda items got ignored; pushed back a little, maybe, but not ignored. Stop trying to blame every problem on the Stuart renaming.

Your swipe at "special interests" reveals what you're really up to, and that's punishing the board for allowing various boogeymen--limousine liberals, social justice warriors, NAACP, etc.--to score a political win, even if it was on what should have been a non-issue (refusing to allow schools to be named after traitors), and even if it means denying hundreds of millions of dollars for improving our schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS and the School Board were responsible and really committed to community engagement, that's the dialogue they would encourage. Do we want more schools with over 2500 students? Are we prepared to have some students in trailers longer if we build a new school? How important is it to make full use of schools with extra capacity like Mount Vernon and Lee? What disparities, in terms of class sizes, are appropriate between schools in high ESOL/FARMS areas and those in wealthier areas? Should we keep spending money busing kids to AAP centers and TJHSST? Is IB worth the extra costs?

None of these questions really are discussed openly, either among School Board members or with the public. You end up with a system that caters only to special interests, and the middle gets the declining share of what's left, at least until they flee for Loudoun.

Voting against the bond would do nothing to foster community engagement or address the issues you mention. Quite the opposite: voting it down would worsen the very capacity problems you claim to be concerned about.

You say "[n]one of these questions really are discussed openly." Where are you getting that from? How many school board meetings, staff meetings, and working groups do you attend? How many times have you actually raised your questions with the board and the staff? What examples can you point to of the community organizing on one of those questions and bringing their concerns to the board, only to be dismissed? Of course they're paying attention to these things. You might not like what they're doing about them, and they may even be doing the wrong thing. But their handling of those issues has nothing to do with renaming Stuart, and I have yet to see any evidence otherwise. Public comments like "it took up a lot of our time" and "it was a tough choice" don't actually imply that other agenda items got ignored; pushed back a little, maybe, but not ignored. Stop trying to blame every problem on the Stuart renaming.

Your swipe at "special interests" reveals what you're really up to, and that's punishing the board for allowing various boogeymen--limousine liberals, social justice warriors, NAACP, etc.--to score a political win, even if it was on what should have been a non-issue (refusing to allow schools to be named after traitors), and even if it means denying hundreds of millions of dollars for improving our schools.

If you want to be an effective shill for FCPS, you're going to have to pay better attention to what's been going on and then come up with a better defense than that. Because anyone who has been paying any attention knows full well that they rarely solicit meaningful community input and instead largely choose to ignore the input they do receive. And yet you want to fault people for declining to engage more actively with a group whose disregard for anyone who does represent one of their favored special interest groups could not be more obvious?

Enough is enough. It's time to send this Board a vote of no confidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS and the School Board were responsible and really committed to community engagement, that's the dialogue they would encourage. Do we want more schools with over 2500 students? Are we prepared to have some students in trailers longer if we build a new school? How important is it to make full use of schools with extra capacity like Mount Vernon and Lee? What disparities, in terms of class sizes, are appropriate between schools in high ESOL/FARMS areas and those in wealthier areas? Should we keep spending money busing kids to AAP centers and TJHSST? Is IB worth the extra costs?

None of these questions really are discussed openly, either among School Board members or with the public. You end up with a system that caters only to special interests, and the middle gets the declining share of what's left, at least until they flee for Loudoun.

Voting against the bond would do nothing to foster community engagement or address the issues you mention. Quite the opposite: voting it down would worsen the very capacity problems you claim to be concerned about.

You say "[n]one of these questions really are discussed openly." Where are you getting that from? How many school board meetings, staff meetings, and working groups do you attend? How many times have you actually raised your questions with the board and the staff? What examples can you point to of the community organizing on one of those questions and bringing their concerns to the board, only to be dismissed? Of course they're paying attention to these things. You might not like what they're doing about them, and they may even be doing the wrong thing. But their handling of those issues has nothing to do with renaming Stuart, and I have yet to see any evidence otherwise. Public comments like "it took up a lot of our time" and "it was a tough choice" don't actually imply that other agenda items got ignored; pushed back a little, maybe, but not ignored. Stop trying to blame every problem on the Stuart renaming.

Your swipe at "special interests" reveals what you're really up to, and that's punishing the board for allowing various boogeymen--limousine liberals, social justice warriors, NAACP, etc.--to score a political win, even if it was on what should have been a non-issue (refusing to allow schools to be named after traitors), and even if it means denying hundreds of millions of dollars for improving our schools.

If you want to be an effective shill for FCPS, you're going to have to pay better attention to what's been going on and then come up with a better defense than that. Because anyone who has been paying any attention knows full well that they rarely solicit meaningful community input and instead largely choose to ignore the input they do receive. And yet you want to fault people for declining to engage more actively with a group whose disregard for anyone who does represent one of their favored special interest groups could not be more obvious?

Enough is enough. It's time to send this Board a vote of no confidence.

DP. Go ahead and vote no, complain on DCUM, decline to engage more actively with the school board, and see how that works for you. I would suggest organizing with like minded people, send letters to the school board, show up at SB meetings and be vocal, and contact the post about why the school board is not making the right choices. You never know, there may be an article about the inefficiencies of the SB that can help your cause. You can't blame the SB if you decline to engage. Well you can, but it gets you nothing of what you want.

[Anonymous]

I think one of their main issues is that they see the average student as a republican issue and so won't focus on them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If FCPS and the School Board were responsible and really committed to community engagement, that's the dialogue they would encourage. Do we want more schools with over 2500 students? Are we prepared to have some students in trailers longer if we build a new school? How important is it to make full use of schools with extra capacity like Mount Vernon and Lee? What disparities, in terms of class sizes, are appropriate between schools in high ESOL/FARMS areas and those in wealthier areas? Should we keep spending money busing kids to AAP centers and TJHSST? Is IB worth the extra costs?

None of these questions really are discussed openly, either among School Board members or with the public. You end up with a system that caters only to special interests, and the middle gets the declining share of what's left, at least until they flee for Loudoun.

Voting against the bond would do nothing to foster community engagement or address the issues you mention. Quite the opposite: voting it down would worsen the very capacity problems you claim to be concerned about.

You say "[n]one of these questions really are discussed openly." Where are you getting that from? How many school board meetings, staff meetings, and working groups do you attend? How many times have you actually raised your questions with the board and the staff? What examples can you point to of the community organizing on one of those questions and bringing their concerns to the board, only to be dismissed? Of course they're paying attention to these things. You might not like what they're doing about them, and they may even be doing the wrong thing. But their handling of those issues has nothing to do with renaming Stuart, and I have yet to see any evidence otherwise. Public comments like "it took up a lot of our time" and "it was a tough choice" don't actually imply that other agenda items got ignored; pushed back a little, maybe, but not ignored. Stop trying to blame every problem on the Stuart renaming.

Your swipe at "special interests" reveals what you're really up to, and that's punishing the board for allowing various boogeymen--limousine liberals, social justice warriors, NAACP, etc.--to score a political win, even if it was on what should have been a non-issue (refusing to allow schools to be named after traitors), and even if it means denying hundreds of millions of dollars for improving our schools.

If you want to be an effective shill for FCPS, you're going to have to pay better attention to what's been going on and then come up with a better defense than that. Because anyone who has been paying any attention knows full well that they rarely solicit meaningful community input and instead largely choose to ignore the input they do receive. And yet you want to fault people for declining to engage more actively with a group whose disregard for anyone who does represent one of their favored special interest groups could not be more obvious?

Enough is enough. It's time to send this Board a vote of no confidence.

They rarely solicit input? Really? Both of my kids school do several principal coffees a year. I get emails from my SB member and the large member every month encouraging me to come to their office hours if 1 have a 1:1 issue to discuss. I get email reminders to come to SB meetings. The superintendent does listening sessions in various parts of the county each year. There is one in Hayfield soon, I think. These are all ways to approach the county with systemic concerns. Of course you can approach teachers and lower level admins with classroom specific problems.

What do you think FCPS should be doing that they are not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think one of their main issues is that they see the average student as a republican issue and so won't focus on them.

No. They see MC and up students or those schools performing well as places that don't need resources because the parents will deal with the education. FCPS spends a huge amount of money on minority students and esl. Class sizes, young scholars, IB. IB was to retain without boundary changes and ebb the outflow on pupil placement.

Cut IB and charge high amounts for PP plus disallow the majority. Scrap any MS aap. Also, FCPS got no extra money from the Obama minors. How many schools have we built or rented for illegals and anchors?

[Anonymous]

The current SB is out of touch. They claim diversity is the system's biggest strength but allow a bloated AAP system that parents with resources use to avoid the diversity. They operate a STEM magnet that is almost all Asian and leads to overcrowding at other schools. They spend money on under-subscribed IB programs, change school names against the will of community residents to appease the NAACP leadership, and ask citizens to fund additions at some schools while leaving others under-enrolled. It's textbook mismanagement and they do not deserve more money until they've shown they are better stewards of our money. Voting against these bonds is a good way to express our frustration and disappointment at their incompetence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The current SB is out of touch. They claim diversity is the system's biggest strength but allow a bloated AAP system that parents with resources use to avoid the diversity. They operate a STEM magnet that is almost all Asian and leads to overcrowding at other schools. They spend money on under-subscribed IB programs, change school names against the will of community residents to appease the NAACP leadership, and ask citizens to fund additions at some schools while leaving others under-enrolled. It's textbook mismanagement and they do not deserve more money until they've shown they are better stewards of our money. Voting against these bonds is a good way to express our frustration and disappointment at their incompetence.

+1000.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think one of their main issues is that they see the average student as a republican issue and so won't focus on them.

GE students are a Democrat issue? Really. I how a lot of Democrats with GE kids. GE kids make up most of the school system. If you have an issue and want to propose s solution, organize other GE parents and raise it. I agree with PP. the school board * does* listen to vocal parents. The AAP parents are vocal, and organized. They also work with FCAG. Every time we have a budget fight, I get a list if actions points from them (and TJPF/ Academic Boosters) I have s list of concrete steps I can take to protect TJ and AAP. It’s well organized. The numbers are with GE, if someone stepped up, provided leaders, and presented GE parents with talking points and a list of talking points, then you might just get some of the things you want. Even Commission a study and writes policy paper, like FCAG does.

But right now, GE parents my gripe individually at SB meeting or at the school. But I have seen the organized effort you get with GE. You have the numbers, get to it and push for change.

And parents will respond if you give the a list of most important talking points, and drafts of emails they can modify for their school and the SB, and encourage then to attend and speak at this SB meeting in this date. I agree with PP— it is not realistic to have parents assume that if they can gripe anonymously, plocies will change. It’s not
that easy.

And realize that if you organize, you will only get some off what you want at first— if that. Not everyone in the county agrees with you. But you will likely get more than you have now. And build credibility to push for bigger changes later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think one of their main issues is that they see the average student as a republican issue and so won't focus on them.

GE students are a Democrat issue? Really. I how a lot of Democrats with GE kids. GE kids make up most of the school system. If you have an issue and want to propose s solution, organize other GE parents and raise it. I agree with PP. the school board * does* listen to vocal parents. The AAP parents are vocal, and organized. They also work with FCAG. Every time we have a budget fight, I get a list if actions points from them (and TJPF/ Academic Boosters) I have s list of concrete steps I can take to protect TJ and AAP. It’s well organized. The numbers are with GE, if someone stepped up, provided leaders, and presented GE parents with talking points and a list of talking points, then you might just get some of the things you want. Even Commission a study and writes policy paper, like FCAG does.

But right now, GE parents my gripe individually at SB meeting or at the school. But I have seen the organized effort you get with GE. You have the numbers, get to it and push for change.

And parents will respond if you give the a list of most important talking points, and drafts of emails they can modify for their school and the SB, and encourage then to attend and speak at this SB meeting in this date. I agree with PP— it is not realistic to have parents assume that if they can gripe anonymously, plocies will change. It’s not
that easy.

And realize that if you organize, you will only get some off what you want at first— if that. Not everyone in the county agrees with you. But you will likely get more than you have now. And build credibility to push for bigger changes later.

Parents of Gen Ed students should not have to separately identify themselves as an advocacy group to have their kids' needs addressed. You are extremely tone-deaf to suggest otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know the strength (if any) of the FCCPTA?

Are they just rubber-stamping what FCPS wants?

I do not see much on the advocacy section of their website:

http://www.fccpta.org/running-pta/advocacy/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know the strength (if any) of the FCCPTA?

Are they just rubber-stamping what FCPS wants?

I do not see much on the advocacy section of their website:

http://www.fccpta.org/running-pta/advocacy/

I did find this Advocacy Day flyer on their Facebook page:

http://myemail.constantcontact.com/Advocacy-Works----Your-Special-Advocacy-Update---November-3.html

Your FCCPTA is proud to host its first annual Advocacy Day event on Monday, December 4 from 6:00PM - 9:00PM at the Gatehouse Center in Falls Church for you, a member of the largest, volunteer advocacy organization in Fairfax County. The event is designed to provide the important opportunity for PTA members to meet, engage, and build relationships with their local elected officials on the Fairfax County School Board and Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. Most of your local elected officials will be in attendance and want to hear your stories about your schools and students. You will have to opportunity to discuss various education issues, ask questions, and ensure that education remains a top priority for your elected officials. If you are not a member, no problem! Anyone can join their local neighborhood school PTA via its website and then JOIN US for this free and important event on December 4! More information will be posted on FCCPTA's social media platforms as details are finalized.