FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many years ago, before SCMS/HS opened, there were some neighborhoods off Gambrill south of the Parkway that were zoned HV/Key/Lewis. I think people are afraid of going back to that, and there was a rumor last summer that all of HVES was going to be rezoned to Lewis.

To be fair, those moves haven’t been on any of the map proposals so far. To come out with that now would be entirely out of left field. But, also to be fair, Anderson has made noise about closing the RVES split feeder by keeping them at RV and sending them to Irving/WSHS, whereas right now they are at RV/Key/Lewis (nominally … a lot of families move before that can become an issue). This change also isn’t on any maps so far but has been specifically mentioned by her at meetings. The current proposals are to close the RV split by sending them to Saratoga ES, which already fully feeds to key/Lewis without a split feeder. This would leave RVES quite under capacity, and Anderson doesn’t seem keen on advocating for RV to get something like a language or other magnet program to fill the excess seats.

I believe that is incorrect. We're in the Middle Valley neighborhood off Gambrill and when South County opened, our neighborhood lobbied the school board to move the kids back to WSHS because they were going from Hunt Valley ES to Irving MS to Lee HS (now Lewis). They didn't go to Key. So the kids were losing all their friends after middle school. That was 19 years ago and the SB moved the neighborhoods back to WSHS (where they went before getting moved to Lee).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many years ago, before SCMS/HS opened, there were some neighborhoods off Gambrill south of the Parkway that were zoned HV/Key/Lewis. I think people are afraid of going back to that, and there was a rumor last summer that all of HVES was going to be rezoned to Lewis.

To be fair, those moves haven’t been on any of the map proposals so far. To come out with that now would be entirely out of left field. But, also to be fair, Anderson has made noise about closing the RVES split feeder by keeping them at RV and sending them to Irving/WSHS, whereas right now they are at RV/Key/Lewis (nominally … a lot of families move before that can become an issue). This change also isn’t on any maps so far but has been specifically mentioned by her at meetings. The current proposals are to close the RV split by sending them to Saratoga ES, which already fully feeds to key/Lewis without a split feeder. This would leave RVES quite under capacity, and Anderson doesn’t seem keen on advocating for RV to get something like a language or other magnet program to fill the excess seats.

I believe that is incorrect. We're in the Middle Valley neighborhood off Gambrill and when South County opened, our neighborhood lobbied the school board to move the kids back to WSHS because they were going from Hunt Valley ES to Irving MS to Lee HS (now Lewis). They didn't go to Key. So the kids were losing all their friends after middle school. That was 19 years ago and the SB moved the neighborhoods back to WSHS (where they went before getting moved to Lee).

Haven't those neighborhoods spent most of their existence zoned for WSHS, with Lewis just a small blip for a few years in the middle?

They have been zoned for WSHS for the past 2 decades

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many years ago, before SCMS/HS opened, there were some neighborhoods off Gambrill south of the Parkway that were zoned HV/Key/Lewis. I think people are afraid of going back to that, and there was a rumor last summer that all of HVES was going to be rezoned to Lewis.

To be fair, those moves haven’t been on any of the map proposals so far. To come out with that now would be entirely out of left field. But, also to be fair, Anderson has made noise about closing the RVES split feeder by keeping them at RV and sending them to Irving/WSHS, whereas right now they are at RV/Key/Lewis (nominally … a lot of families move before that can become an issue). This change also isn’t on any maps so far but has been specifically mentioned by her at meetings. The current proposals are to close the RV split by sending them to Saratoga ES, which already fully feeds to key/Lewis without a split feeder. This would leave RVES quite under capacity, and Anderson doesn’t seem keen on advocating for RV to get something like a language or other magnet program to fill the excess seats.

Coming out of left field is exactly what can happen with the next round of maps. The Gambrill rd families are preparing for left field. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many years ago, before SCMS/HS opened, there were some neighborhoods off Gambrill south of the Parkway that were zoned HV/Key/Lewis. I think people are afraid of going back to that, and there was a rumor last summer that all of HVES was going to be rezoned to Lewis.

To be fair, those moves haven’t been on any of the map proposals so far. To come out with that now would be entirely out of left field. But, also to be fair, Anderson has made noise about closing the RVES split feeder by keeping them at RV and sending them to Irving/WSHS, whereas right now they are at RV/Key/Lewis (nominally … a lot of families move before that can become an issue). This change also isn’t on any maps so far but has been specifically mentioned by her at meetings. The current proposals are to close the RV split by sending them to Saratoga ES, which already fully feeds to key/Lewis without a split feeder. This would leave RVES quite under capacity, and Anderson doesn’t seem keen on advocating for RV to get something like a language or other magnet program to fill the excess seats.

I believe that is incorrect. We're in the Middle Valley neighborhood off Gambrill and when South County opened, our neighborhood lobbied the school board to move the kids back to WSHS because they were going from Hunt Valley ES to Irving MS to Lee HS (now Lewis). They didn't go to Key. So the kids were losing all their friends after middle school. That was 19 years ago and the SB moved the neighborhoods back to WSHS (where they went before getting moved to Lee).

Haven't those neighborhoods spent most of their existence zoned for WSHS, with Lewis just a small blip for a few years in the middle?

They have been zoned for WSHS for the past 2 decades

Exactly. And they didn’t move Gambrill rd/pohick rd areas to SC when it opened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many years ago, before SCMS/HS opened, there were some neighborhoods off Gambrill south of the Parkway that were zoned HV/Key/Lewis. I think people are afraid of going back to that, and there was a rumor last summer that all of HVES was going to be rezoned to Lewis.

To be fair, those moves haven’t been on any of the map proposals so far. To come out with that now would be entirely out of left field. But, also to be fair, Anderson has made noise about closing the RVES split feeder by keeping them at RV and sending them to Irving/WSHS, whereas right now they are at RV/Key/Lewis (nominally … a lot of families move before that can become an issue). This change also isn’t on any maps so far but has been specifically mentioned by her at meetings. The current proposals are to close the RV split by sending them to Saratoga ES, which already fully feeds to key/Lewis without a split feeder. This would leave RVES quite under capacity, and Anderson doesn’t seem keen on advocating for RV to get something like a language or other magnet program to fill the excess seats.

I believe that is incorrect. We're in the Middle Valley neighborhood off Gambrill and when South County opened, our neighborhood lobbied the school board to move the kids back to WSHS because they were going from Hunt Valley ES to Irving MS to Lee HS (now Lewis). They didn't go to Key. So the kids were losing all their friends after middle school. That was 19 years ago and the SB moved the neighborhoods back to WSHS (where they went before getting moved to Lee).

Haven't those neighborhoods spent most of their existence zoned for WSHS, with Lewis just a small blip for a few years in the middle?

They have been zoned for WSHS for the past 2 decades

I didn’t realize they only went to Lewis HS and that they went to Irving MS. Regardless, point still stands. And yes, that particular split feeder has been closed for about 20 years. Here is some background info I found: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/2005/01/09/school-sparks-fervent-battle/32e1f059-9aad-48b5-974c-b4e73d1eca78/

“ But the Morrisses' three children, and others from their South Hunt Valley neighborhood, would be sent to Lake Braddock Secondary School, even farther from their home than Lee High School, which teenagers in their neighborhood now attend.” So the original proposal was to send them to Lake Braddock instead, that never materialized, and instead a deal was struck somewhere along the line to close the split feeder and send everyone in HVES to WSHS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Board Meeting tomorrow night, and the below vote is buried in the end of the meeting. The link has the full text in red with strike-throughs of the changes they're voting on https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/Public . I think this impacts the boundary review:



Subject: Revision of Policy 8130 Regarding Phasing
Staff Contact: Christina Setlow, Clerk to the School Board
Other Staff Present: Kevin Jackson, Deputy Clerk to the School Board; Janet Brown, Deputy Clerk to the School Board
Meeting Category: July 10, 2025 - New Business
School Board Action Required: Information

Summary/Background (Key Points):

VII. PHASING OF ADJUSTMENTS

Adjustments under this policy shall be implemented through attrition and phasing.

Elementary Schools: When a boundary adjustment occurs at the middle school level, at the discretion of the School Board, rising sixth (or fifth) graders may be provided the option to remain in the school of attendance prior to the boundary change.


Middle Schools: When a boundary adjustment occurs at the middle school level, attendance in the new school boundary shall be mandatory for incoming 6th grade students in schools with a 6-8 grade configuration and for incoming 7th grade students in schools with a 7-8 grade level configuration. Currently enrolled students shall be given the option to remain at the school or attend the school in the new boundary. These allowances shall not be applicable in the opening of a new school, or in the closing of an existing school.


High Schools: When a boundary adjustment occurs at the high school level, attendance in the new school boundary shall be mandatory for incoming 9th grade students. Students in grades 10-12 shall be given the option to remain at their current school or attend the school in the new boundary. These allowances shall not be applicable in the opening of a new school, or in the closing of an existing school

The School Board may adopt other phasing plans as appropriate to the individual boundary study.

These allowances shall not be applicable in the opening of a new school, or in the closing of an existing school -- this sucks for families being moved to the King Abdullah Academy in a couple to few years.

[Anonymous]

Everyone seems pretty happy about the possibility of getting moved to KAA. Its a beautiful campus.

Everyone seems pretty unhappy about possible downhill effects from KAA, eg their kids being switched from one existing school to another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone seems pretty happy about the possibility of getting moved to KAA. Its a beautiful campus.

Everyone seems pretty unhappy about possible downhill effects from KAA, eg their kids being switched from one existing school to another.

There is a handful of posters on DCuM that will kick and scream at you at the mere mention of thinking through the ramifications of the school purchase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone seems pretty happy about the possibility of getting moved to KAA. Its a beautiful campus.

Everyone seems pretty unhappy about possible downhill effects from KAA, eg their kids being switched from one existing school to another.

There is a handful of posters on DCuM that will kick and scream at you at the mere mention of thinking through the ramifications of the school purchase.

True. There are also posters who can only come up with "process" as an excuse for what seems to be a wise move.

I don't recall a lot of public input to other purchases of land. Was there an outcry when they purchased the South County site? Westfield? Coates?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone seems pretty happy about the possibility of getting moved to KAA. Its a beautiful campus.

Everyone seems pretty unhappy about possible downhill effects from KAA, eg their kids being switched from one existing school to another.

There is a handful of posters on DCuM that will kick and scream at you at the mere mention of thinking through the ramifications of the school purchase.

True. There are also posters who can only come up with "process" as an excuse for what seems to be a wise move.

I don't recall a lot of public input to other purchases of land. Was there an outcry when they purchased the South County site? Westfield? Coates?

DP. They didn’t just acquire land here. It’s an entire school and the purchase price was significantly higher. Do you think it cost $150M to buy the Coates site?

[Anonymous]

I just wish they would combine the boundary adjustments and the opening of the new HS into a single timeline. Let's upheave children from their schools ONCE and only once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just wish they would combine the boundary adjustments and the opening of the new HS into a single timeline. Let's upheave children from their schools ONCE and only once.

Or, just hear me out, let’s upheave children only when absolutely necessary, like Coates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish they would combine the boundary adjustments and the opening of the new HS into a single timeline. Let's upheave children from their schools ONCE and only once.

Or, just hear me out, let’s upheave children only when absolutely necessary, like Coates.

Yes, absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just wish they would combine the boundary adjustments and the opening of the new HS into a single timeline. Let's upheave children from their schools ONCE and only once.

But why are they even doing this boundary adjustment? I was at a swim meet this morning and the pool we were swimming against is located smack in the middle of the Annandale High School boundaries. It was the last home meet, so they honored the two seniors on the team. One graduated from Woodson High School and one from Lake Braddock. Most kids join the NVSL team closest to their house, so why is it that two kids on a team located near Annandale High School did not go there? Just get rid of all of the loopholes for kids to leave their zoned high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just wish they would combine the boundary adjustments and the opening of the new HS into a single timeline. Let's upheave children from their schools ONCE and only once.

But why are they even doing this boundary adjustment? I was at a swim meet this morning and the pool we were swimming against is located smack in the middle of the Annandale High School boundaries. It was the last home meet, so they honored the two seniors on the team. One graduated from Woodson High School and one from Lake Braddock. Most kids join the NVSL team closest to their house, so why is it that two kids on a team located near Annandale High School did not go there? Just get rid of all of the loopholes for kids to leave their zoned high school.

AP