FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fairfacts Matters has posted a great recap of the meeting.

please post here!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fairfacts Matters has posted a great recap of the meeting.

please post here!

scroll back. It's been posted more than once, i think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BRAC UPDATE: On June 23, 2025, FCPS held another BRAC meeting to discuss the community feedback provided via the second set of regional meetings, the Boundary Review Scenario Explorer, and through our individual discussions with community members. Unfortunately, the process remains deeply flawed and continues to draw serious concern from many BRAC members, who expressed strong frustration and disappointment during the meeting.

We were disappointed to see that the shared community comments are not fully published. Our community gave feedback in abundance and it was not included in the latest information published. This is concerning because either the feedback tool has errors in reporting comments, or the committee is hand picking what it wants to share, thus making it seem like our neighborhood doesn’t have concerns.



• BRAC members were presented with a summary of the feedback submitted to date. However, several inaccuracies were identified in Thru Consulting’s characterization of BRAC’s input. Multiple members requested corrections, underscoring broader concerns that BRAC feedback is being misrepresented and that flawed information may be shaping FCPS and Thru’s decision-making.

• Thru shared details about “errors” affecting three boundary scenarios in Region 4. These issues impact Kings Park ES, Kings Glen ES, Ravensworth ES, Eagle View ES, Fairfax Villa ES, Willow Spring ES, Katherine Johnson MS, Frost MS, Fairfax HS, Woodson HS, Irving MS, South County MS, Hunt Valley ES, West Springfield HS, and South County HS. Thru is soliciting alternative proposals to address the problems, signaling that substantial changes to the maps are still forthcoming.

• Many BRAC members voiced frustration that long-standing data requests remain unfulfilled, despite having been submitted months ago. Thru is now asking members to resubmit their requests using a newly created spreadsheet, further delaying the process. In addition, Thru continues to avoid providing justification for why specific boundary changes were proposed over other viable alternatives. Superintendent Reid has not taken steps to ensure BRAC members receive this information, instead deferring to Thru when these questions arise.

• Members were informed that they are now expected to redraw maps and submit proposed changes by July 7, despite not yet having access to critical data needed to inform these revisions. Thru stated that additional data will be released at the next BRAC meeting on August 5, but by that time, updated maps will already be drafted—raising serious concerns about the credibility of the process and the ability of BRAC members to meaningfully contribute. Thru also requested each region’s BRAC representatives to coordinate separately and identify the top 10 priorities for each region as part of the boundary review process. This request is highly concerning given that draft maps have already been released publicly.

• These evolving changes are particularly troubling given that newly impacted communities will have significantly less time to provide feedback before maps are finalized in November.

• A FairFACTS Matters BRAC representative asked how the recent acquisition of Western High School will be factored into the current boundary review. Superintendent Reid stated that it will not be included. She expects the acquisition to be finalized by mid-August, with a possible opening in Fall 2026. She would not share any information on whether the facility will serve as a traditional public school, magnet program, or another model.

• Next steps: BRAC members have been asked to work within their regional groups to submit map feedback by July 7. The full BRAC will reconvene on August 5 and September 3.



FFM is committed to advocating for transparency and accuracy throughout this process and to addressing community concerns about the process’s integrity. If you have any information that you want raised at the BRAC meetings, please reach out to us. The slides from yesterday’s meeting can be found here: https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/6-23-2025AdvisoryCommitteeMeetingPresentation.pdf

It appears the consultants, who aren’t even public school boundary rezoning experts, are dropping the ball here. FCPS would likely have been better doing this in-house with the BRAC.

Other districts have implemented the online boundary tool in-house, if that’s the main reason for hiring the consultant. They just need to hire planners with the right level of expertise and experience with public engagement.

[Anonymous]

BRAC members are very important in this process but not all are consistently active or getting feedback from their communities - this is problem Reid should prioritize if the ask is for these folks to help redraw the maps

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BRAC members are very important in this process but not all are consistently active or getting feedback from their communities - this is problem Reid should prioritize if the ask is for these folks to help redraw the maps

How do you c9ntzct your pyramid reps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BRAC members are very important in this process but not all are consistently active or getting feedback from their communities - this is problem Reid should prioritize if the ask is for these folks to help redraw the maps

What was the point of suggesting people all over the county input their suggestions on the boundary tool if it's going to be some random BRAC members "redrawing the maps."

I guess it was just to waste people's time and/or make them feel like they could provide input that will then be ignored.

My pyramid reps are either not representative of the pyramid or totally AWOL so we are basically screwed by FCPS yet again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BRAC members are very important in this process but not all are consistently active or getting feedback from their communities - this is problem Reid should prioritize if the ask is for these folks to help redraw the maps

What was the point of suggesting people all over the county input their suggestions on the boundary tool if it's going to be some random BRAC members "redrawing the maps."

I guess it was just to waste people's time and/or make them feel like they could provide input that will then be ignored.

My pyramid reps are either not representative of the pyramid or totally AWOL so we are basically screwed by FCPS yet again.

Same here. Unless you personally know them, it's even difficult to know which neighborhoods they are from. If they don't yet have kids in high school, it makes it very difficult to figure it out.
How are we supposed to contact them directly? Is there an fcps email for them?

[Anonymous]

Interesting framing in this story, which posted this afternoon: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/06/26/fairfax-county-public-schools-try-to-mitigate-expectations-for-upcoming-redistricting/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting framing in this story, which posted this afternoon: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/06/26/fairfax-county-public-schools-try-to-mitigate-expectations-for-upcoming-redistricting/

Interesting. Maybe they are going to make decisions first on KAA and then start adjusting. But, they need to fix first things first, and that is Coates and Parklawn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BRAC members are very important in this process but not all are consistently active or getting feedback from their communities - this is problem Reid should prioritize if the ask is for these folks to help redraw the maps

What was the point of suggesting people all over the county input their suggestions on the boundary tool if it's going to be some random BRAC members "redrawing the maps."

I guess it was just to waste people's time and/or make them feel like they could provide input that will then be ignored.

My pyramid reps are either not representative of the pyramid or totally AWOL so we are basically screwed by FCPS yet again.

Same here. Unless you personally know them, it's even difficult to know which neighborhoods they are from. If they don't yet have kids in high school, it makes it very difficult to figure it out.
How are we supposed to contact them directly? Is there an fcps email for them?

I'm on the BRAC. We asked to have emails specifically for our role and we were told to create a gmail account. Most pyramids have at least one member who has created an account and you can access them here.
https://www.fcps.edu/members-superintendents-boundary-review-advisory-committee

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting framing in this story, which posted this afternoon: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/06/26/fairfax-county-public-schools-try-to-mitigate-expectations-for-upcoming-redistricting/

Interesting. Maybe they are going to make decisions first on KAA and then start adjusting. But, they need to fix first things first, and that is Coates and Parklawn?

I wonder if this process may end up getting pushed out another year, with fall 2027 being the effective date of any changes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting framing in this story, which posted this afternoon: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/06/26/fairfax-county-public-schools-try-to-mitigate-expectations-for-upcoming-redistricting/

Interesting. Maybe they are going to make decisions first on KAA and then start adjusting. But, they need to fix first things first, and that is Coates and Parklawn?

I wonder if this process may end up getting pushed out another year, with fall 2027 being the effective date of any changes?

Or, it could be:

1. they realize this is a mess
2. this is deflection

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting framing in this story, which posted this afternoon: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/06/26/fairfax-county-public-schools-try-to-mitigate-expectations-for-upcoming-redistricting/

Interesting. Maybe they are going to make decisions first on KAA and then start adjusting. But, they need to fix first things first, and that is Coates and Parklawn?

I wonder if this process may end up getting pushed out another year, with fall 2027 being the effective date of any changes?

Or, it could be:

1. they realize this is a mess
2. this is deflection

This started out as an effort by School Board politicians to avoid accountability and it will end as an effort by School Board politicians to avoid accountability.

The fact is that this county-wide boundary review is a fiasco. They haven't tackled any of the "big" issues, and they've retained an outside consultant that's shown it's unable to tackle "small" issues sensibly.

Add to that the fact that they couldn't resist buying the KAA in the middle of the review, and as yet appear to have no clue as to how many FCPS students could attend that school or what the implications could be for school boundaries.

All they really want now is bring this thing to a close with a whimper, but they will propose to screw just enough people over that this will be impossible.

Maybe next time they'll have clearer goals or be willing to have the courage of their convictions, but for now all they've shown is that they are both cowardly and deeply incompetent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting framing in this story, which posted this afternoon: https://www.ffxnow.com/2025/06/26/fairfax-county-public-schools-try-to-mitigate-expectations-for-upcoming-redistricting/

Interesting. Maybe they are going to make decisions first on KAA and then start adjusting. But, they need to fix first things first, and that is Coates and Parklawn?

I wonder if this process may end up getting pushed out another year, with fall 2027 being the effective date of any changes?

Or, it could be:

1. they realize this is a mess
2. this is deflection

This started out as an effort by School Board politicians to avoid accountability and it will end as an effort by School Board politicians to avoid accountability.

The fact is that this county-wide boundary review is a fiasco. They haven't tackled any of the "big" issues, and they've retained an outside consultant that's shown it's unable to tackle "small" issues sensibly.

Add to that the fact that they couldn't resist buying the KAA in the middle of the review, and as yet appear to have no clue as to how many FCPS students could attend that school or what the implications could be for school boundaries.

All they really want now is bring this thing to a close with a whimper, but they will propose to screw just enough people over that this will be impossible.

Maybe next time they'll have clearer goals or be willing to have the courage of their convictions, but for now all they've shown is that they are both cowardly and deeply incompetent.

Yeah, it's not hard to see how they're starting to back-peddle on all of their "we haven't had a comprehensive review in 40 years and must make major changes across the county" language. Now some of the school board members are saying it won't be major, it might take longer to be implemented and not to expect big changes. It's almost like they're finally hearing all of the complaints from constituents in their areas and are freaked out.

[Anonymous]

Collectively need to keep up the pressure because maybe not big changes everywhere but for those of us with listed changes that don’t make sense we don’t want them!