FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Those poor BRAC members. They must feel so used and abused by now, plus it seems they never get the information they’ve requested.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they just completely gloss over how the KAA acquisition will impact this? Anyone in the meeting know if that was discussed at any point?

They’re not presenting updated maps until August 5.

Is this where the committee weighs in?

There’s a schedule on slide 22

July 7: BRAC tells the consultants their priorities.
Aug 5: Consultants present BRAC with updated scenarios.
Sept 3: Consultants present updated scenario based on Aug 5 feedback.

What’s great is that BRAC is broken up by regions for this exercise and Region 5 is all KAA drama and then Marshall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did they just completely gloss over how the KAA acquisition will impact this? Anyone in the meeting know if that was discussed at any point?

They’re not presenting updated maps until August 5.

Is this where the committee weighs in?

There’s a schedule on slide 22

July 7: BRAC tells the consultants their priorities.
Aug 5: Consultants present BRAC with updated scenarios.
Sept 3: Consultants present updated scenario based on Aug 5 feedback.

What’s great is that BRAC is broken up by regions for this exercise and Region 5 is all KAA drama and then Marshall.

So, where do the organization reps fall in--since they are not representing regions?

[Anonymous]

BRAC members are getting jerked around. Imagine being a BRAC member who has to go to these meetings just to be spoon-fed information that the community receives a day later.

I’d be through with thru.

[Anonymous]

at the BRAC meeting someone asked reid how the western high school acquisition would affect the boundary review and she said it isn’t being considered as part of the review! but that it should open fall 2026. how? how can it not be included when it seems like it will affect so many schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:at the BRAC meeting someone asked reid how the western high school acquisition would affect the boundary review and she said it isn’t being considered as part of the review! but that it should open fall 2026. how? how can it not be included when it seems like it will affect so many schools

What a farce. As between this School Board and Reid, FCPS has never been in the hands of so many deeply incompetent people.

[Anonymous]

Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

Well according to the newly posted slides, the new HV split was an “error”. Just like this whole stupid thing is an error.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

Well according to the newly posted slides, the new HV split was an “error”. Just like this whole stupid thing is an error.

It means they’re going to mess with elementary school boundaries too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

Well according to the newly posted slides, the new HV split was an “error”. Just like this whole stupid thing is an error.

The way they worded it, though, made it clear Thru didn’t think it was an error.

This whole thing is a mess. We’re in West Springfield and the KAA won’t impact us at all but I cannot for the life of me figure out how you don’t include that new school in these scenarios. Or postpone the review until they figure out what they’re doing with that school.

These people are truly incompetent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

Well according to the newly posted slides, the new HV split was an “error”. Just like this whole stupid thing is an error.

The way they worded it, though, made it clear Thru didn’t think it was an error.

This whole thing is a mess. We’re in West Springfield and the KAA won’t impact us at all but I cannot for the life of me figure out how you don’t include that new school in these scenarios. Or postpone the review until they figure out what they’re doing with that school.

These people are truly incompetent.

You think Thru wants to go forward with making another split feeder and go against one of the goals of the review?

I wondered if they will figure out moving us south of the parkway people to newington.

My hope was mistake=not any changes but I guess not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

Well according to the newly posted slides, the new HV split was an “error”. Just like this whole stupid thing is an error.

The way they worded it, though, made it clear Thru didn’t think it was an error.

This whole thing is a mess. We’re in West Springfield and the KAA won’t impact us at all but I cannot for the life of me figure out how you don’t include that new school in these scenarios. Or postpone the review until they figure out what they’re doing with that school.

These people are truly incompetent.

It really is mind blowing. The new high school is gonna have such a big cascading effect on boundaries. To continue on with the current process is negligent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:at the BRAC meeting someone asked reid how the western high school acquisition would affect the boundary review and she said it isn’t being considered as part of the review! but that it should open fall 2026. how? how can it not be included when it seems like it will affect so many schools

What a farce. As between this School Board and Reid, FCPS has never been in the hands of so many deeply incompetent people.

Agree that they should acknowledge it. This whole study has been a farce. However, this does not create problems but solves them.
Except for Western Fairfax, it should not have much impact.

It meets stated goals:

Proximity
Keeping neighborhoods together
Reduces transportation costs
Eliminates overcrowding.
Chantilly has been cited as overcrowded and one of the schools that needs relief. It frees up space at Westfield (which has new construction nearby) and allows it to take students from Centreville. This, in turn, would allow a neighborhood right next to Centreville to go to Centreville instead of making the long trek to Fairfax.
It might eliminate the need for Centreville to have a large expansion when they get their new update.
This is a win for all these students.
Two of the scenarios by Thru include splitting Oak Hill between Oakton and Chantilly. This would resolve that.

If Crossfield is included, it eliminates a very long bus ride on I66 or winding back roads. And, it keeps Franklin Farm together. A big development is going to be built near Oakton. This will result in overcrowding.

So, this does not have as many far reaching tentacles as some would think. It resolves problems. It will have little impact outside of this area which was on THRU's chopping block anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

Well according to the newly posted slides, the new HV split was an “error”. Just like this whole stupid thing is an error.

The way they worded it, though, made it clear Thru didn’t think it was an error.

This whole thing is a mess. We’re in West Springfield and the KAA won’t impact us at all but I cannot for the life of me figure out how you don’t include that new school in these scenarios. Or postpone the review until they figure out what they’re doing with that school.

These people are truly incompetent.

Yes, they didn’t consider it an “error” because it would be around a 35% split and they were concerned with splits less than 25%. I’m sure the HV reps on the BRAC brought it up and good for them because it doesn’t need to happen anyway, but it seems like they’d ultimately be ok creating another ES split feeder since more than 25% would be going to a different HS.

If they go ahead with the 35% to SCMS/HS + the Sangster island + Hagel Circle remaining at SCMS/HS, that puts the middle school at 105% capacity by my back of the envelope math, and the HS around 96%. That is assuming there is 2x the number of high schoolers vs. middle schoolers, but usually, the number of HSers is slightly higher than 2x. They’ll instantly put SC at high 90s to over 100 capacity when WS is the much larger and more up to date building that can handle a large student population.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they still think Irving/WSHS needs relief from overcrowding? There is no new development in that area - no new neighborhoods of tightly packed 3 bedroom TH’s being built that will attract many new families. Just older homes eventually, and very gradually, turning over from the original owners and empty nesters. And it’s common knowledge that birth rates started to fall in 2008 with the recession. Most of the 2007 kids turned 18 and graduated this year, then you’d have a few of the late birthday ones graduating at the end of this coming school year and then the graduating classes should start to drop in size.

They can’t shuffle kids out of Irving/WS to South County MS/HS and also keep the Hagel Circle island at SC. There isn’t enough room. The original proposal was to move Hagel Circle out of Halley/SC to Lorton Station/Hayfield. The current scenarios have it at Gunston/SC AND (they estimate) 35% of HV also at SC, AND a smaller number of students currently at Lake Braddock to South County. This also would almost certainly create another Title 1 school at Gunston, and with all the uncertainty around federal funding for education, that doesn’t seem to be the smartest move (Halley was never Title 1 so it’s not as though it’s just moving a designation from one school to another).

Anyone else out here in the hinterlands care to weigh in?

Well according to the newly posted slides, the new HV split was an “error”. Just like this whole stupid thing is an error.

The way they worded it, though, made it clear Thru didn’t think it was an error.

This whole thing is a mess. We’re in West Springfield and the KAA won’t impact us at all but I cannot for the life of me figure out how you don’t include that new school in these scenarios. Or postpone the review until they figure out what they’re doing with that school.

These people are truly incompetent.

It really is mind blowing. The new high school is gonna have such a big cascading effect on boundaries. To continue on with the current process is negligent.

They feel like they can’t delay, because then changes happen in August 2027 - two months before sb elections.

They haven’t quite caught on to the fact that it doesn’t matter if it is 2026 or 2027. Voters won’t stand for these boundary changes, and they’ll be screwed election season either way.