Show me the law that says school boards cannot change boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Why do people feel that because they buy a house in one school boundary that they are entitled to that same boundary for eternity? Are they so stupid that they don’t realize that populations and needs shift from time to time?

[Anonymous]

If you actually don't know the answer, I don't think you should be calling anyone stupid.

School assignments are closely connected to property values. If you paid a lot for a house in one zone, of course you would object to being rezoned in a way that devalues your house, which is likely your largest asset. It has nothing to do with what people would agree is best in the abstract, or with what is legally allowed. But you knew that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you actually don't know the answer, I don't think you should be calling anyone stupid.

School assignments are closely connected to property values. If you paid a lot for a house in one zone, of course you would object to being rezoned in a way that devalues your house, which is likely your largest asset. It has nothing to do with what people would agree is best in the abstract, or with what is legally allowed. But you knew that.

DP, I can understand why people have those preferences, but they are not entitled to maintain their zoning. Too many people don’t see it that way, though. I realize this is probably about FCPS and not APS, but I remember sitting in a meeting at Nottingham when APS was considering making that an option school and a dad whose block would have been rezoned to a slightly lower-performing school yelled about how he bought his house because it was zoned for Nottingham and the school board owed it to him to keep their “promise” that his family would stay there (there had been no such promise). It was so embarrassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you actually don't know the answer, I don't think you should be calling anyone stupid.

School assignments are closely connected to property values. If you paid a lot for a house in one zone, of course you would object to being rezoned in a way that devalues your house, which is likely your largest asset. It has nothing to do with what people would agree is best in the abstract, or with what is legally allowed. But you knew that.

DP, I can understand why people have those preferences, but they are not entitled to maintain their zoning. Too many people don’t see it that way, though. I realize this is probably about FCPS and not APS, but I remember sitting in a meeting at Nottingham when APS was considering making that an option school and a dad whose block would have been rezoned to a slightly lower-performing school yelled about how he bought his house because it was zoned for Nottingham and the school board owed it to him to keep their “promise” that his family would stay there (there had been no such promise). It was so embarrassing.

OP here. This is exactly my point. There is no guarantee (nor should there be) that your boundary will stay the same indefinitely. Do these same people throw a fit if their stock investments go down?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you actually don't know the answer, I don't think you should be calling anyone stupid.

School assignments are closely connected to property values. If you paid a lot for a house in one zone, of course you would object to being rezoned in a way that devalues your house, which is likely your largest asset. It has nothing to do with what people would agree is best in the abstract, or with what is legally allowed. But you knew that.

Let’s say your house value declines because the housing market tanks. Are you entitled to sell your house at a greater price than you bought it for? Are you going to yell and stomp your foot at the unfortunate luck?

That’s what a boundary change is. The luck of the draw. You need to accept that.

[Anonymous]

Most people are not unreasonable. I think in FCPS that lack of transparency has caused a lot of problems. Most people want to stay where they are. Yes, it does affect property values, but I think that school and community loyalty is the bigger issue.

People pay closer attention to what the SB is doing now, but in the past, some boundary redistrictings seemed to come out of nowhere. My community went through a middle and two high school redistrictings over the last twenty years. Two of them involved new schools and did not take anyone by surprise. The third was totally a surprise to our community. We ended up being unaffected, but we had to fight for it. Our property values would not likely have been affected as one option was actually a "better rated" school than the one we are assigned and the other was quite similar. Distance and community were the driving factors to us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most people are not unreasonable. I think in FCPS that lack of transparency has caused a lot of problems. Most people want to stay where they are. Yes, it does affect property values, but I think that school and community loyalty is the bigger issue.

People pay closer attention to what the SB is doing now, but in the past, some boundary redistrictings seemed to come out of nowhere. My community went through a middle and two high school redistrictings over the last twenty years. Two of them involved new schools and did not take anyone by surprise. The third was totally a surprise to our community. We ended up being unaffected, but we had to fight for it. Our property values would not likely have been affected as one option was actually a "better rated" school than the one we are assigned and the other was quite similar. Distance and community were the driving factors to us.

All good points. I agree that FCPS has not been transparent. I can also see why folks would be concerned about community related issues.

But you can’t argue that those in the far west side of GF are truly part of the Langley community some 14 miles away? I can assure you those in McLean do not care about that side of GF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are not unreasonable. I think in FCPS that lack of transparency has caused a lot of problems. Most people want to stay where they are. Yes, it does affect property values, but I think that school and community loyalty is the bigger issue.

People pay closer attention to what the SB is doing now, but in the past, some boundary redistrictings seemed to come out of nowhere. My community went through a middle and two high school redistrictings over the last twenty years. Two of them involved new schools and did not take anyone by surprise. The third was totally a surprise to our community. We ended up being unaffected, but we had to fight for it. Our property values would not likely have been affected as one option was actually a "better rated" school than the one we are assigned and the other was quite similar. Distance and community were the driving factors to us.

All good points. I agree that FCPS has not been transparent. I can also see why folks would be concerned about community related issues.

But you can’t argue that those in the far west side of GF are truly part of the Langley community some 14 miles away? I can assure you those in McLean do not care about that side of GF.

That is not my community and I would not wish for my kids to be going that far away to school. However, we all know there is not currently room at Herndon. I think some of those neighborhoods might have been in the wash for South Lakes, but Janie kept them out of consideration. I'm not that familiar with the roads and geography, but some of them are nearer South Lakes, I think. Since I am not that familiar with them, I really cannot say. But, right now, if they wish to stay at Langley, I think it makes sense. If Langley were overcrowded, that might be different. Right around the time of the South Lakes redistricting Langley was being expanded. Maybe, Janie arranged that in order to keep them out of the redistricting.

To me, in this mess of traffic gridlock, distance and commute should be the driving factors. I think people resent being sent farther away to "balance" a school. As long as logic is involved, I think most people would accept the results. They might not like it, but they would accept it. Ultimately, I think that resulted in the success of the South Lakes redistricting. The neighborhoods selected were closer to South Lakes than to the high schools they were previously attending. In one instance, South Lakes was much, much closer. In the other, it was likely pretty much the same. I'm not at all familiar with those from Wolf Trap who were reassigned to South Lakes from Madison, so I cannot say how that worked out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are not unreasonable. I think in FCPS that lack of transparency has caused a lot of problems. Most people want to stay where they are. Yes, it does affect property values, but I think that school and community loyalty is the bigger issue.

People pay closer attention to what the SB is doing now, but in the past, some boundary redistrictings seemed to come out of nowhere. My community went through a middle and two high school redistrictings over the last twenty years. Two of them involved new schools and did not take anyone by surprise. The third was totally a surprise to our community. We ended up being unaffected, but we had to fight for it. Our property values would not likely have been affected as one option was actually a "better rated" school than the one we are assigned and the other was quite similar. Distance and community were the driving factors to us.

All good points. I agree that FCPS has not been transparent. I can also see why folks would be concerned about community related issues.

But you can’t argue that those in the far west side of GF are truly part of the Langley community some 14 miles away? I can assure you those in McLean do not care about that side of GF.

That is not my community and I would not wish for my kids to be going that far away to school. However, we all know there is not currently room at Herndon. I think some of those neighborhoods might have been in the wash for South Lakes, but Janie kept them out of consideration. I'm not that familiar with the roads and geography, but some of them are nearer South Lakes, I think. Since I am not that familiar with them, I really cannot say. But, right now, if they wish to stay at Langley, I think it makes sense. If Langley were overcrowded, that might be different. Right around the time of the South Lakes redistricting Langley was being expanded. Maybe, Janie arranged that in order to keep them out of the redistricting.

To me, in this mess of traffic gridlock, distance and commute should be the driving factors. I think people resent being sent farther away to "balance" a school. As long as logic is involved, I think most people would accept the results. They might not like it, but they would accept it. Ultimately, I think that resulted in the success of the South Lakes redistricting. The neighborhoods selected were closer to South Lakes than to the high schools they were previously attending. In one instance, South Lakes was much, much closer. In the other, it was likely pretty much the same. I'm not at all familiar with those from Wolf Trap who were reassigned to South Lakes from Madison, so I cannot say how that worked out.

Aldrin and Armstrong should be feeding into South Lakes. That frees up more than enough room at HHS for western GF. It will be a quicker commute for them anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you actually don't know the answer, I don't think you should be calling anyone stupid.

School assignments are closely connected to property values. If you paid a lot for a house in one zone, of course you would object to being rezoned in a way that devalues your house, which is likely your largest asset. It has nothing to do with what people would agree is best in the abstract, or with what is legally allowed. But you knew that.

DP, I can understand why people have those preferences, but they are not entitled to maintain their zoning. Too many people don’t see it that way, though. I realize this is probably about FCPS and not APS, but I remember sitting in a meeting at Nottingham when APS was considering making that an option school and a dad whose block would have been rezoned to a slightly lower-performing school yelled about how he bought his house because it was zoned for Nottingham and the school board owed it to him to keep their “promise” that his family would stay there (there had been no such promise). It was so embarrassing.

Particularly so because the schools a Nottingham kid could be rezoned to are Discovery or Tuckahoe, which are basically indistinguishable from Nottingham.

[Anonymous]

Aldrin and Armstrong should be feeding into South Lakes. That frees up more than enough room at HHS for western GF. It will be a quicker commute for them anyway.

Seriously? Both are closer to Herndon High and the commute is much shorter. Especially, in the morning. How could you possibly figure a quicker commute. They would have to cross the DTR which has heavy, heavy traffic in the morning. It will be worse when the Reston Town Center Metro opens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Most people are not unreasonable. I think in FCPS that lack of transparency has caused a lot of problems. Most people want to stay where they are. Yes, it does affect property values, but I think that school and community loyalty is the bigger issue.

People pay closer attention to what the SB is doing now, but in the past, some boundary redistrictings seemed to come out of nowhere. My community went through a middle and two high school redistrictings over the last twenty years. Two of them involved new schools and did not take anyone by surprise. The third was totally a surprise to our community. We ended up being unaffected, but we had to fight for it. Our property values would not likely have been affected as one option was actually a "better rated" school than the one we are assigned and the other was quite similar. Distance and community were the driving factors to us.

Agree. People in Fairfax also get hot about it because, as far as I know, there's never been a redistricting that has negatively affected a SB member's property values.

[Anonymous]

Agree. People in Fairfax also get hot about it because, as far as I know, there's never been a redistricting that has negatively affected a SB member's property values.

LOL! Around the time of the South Lakes redistricting--it was when the K's went full day in all schools, Kathy Smith kicked a group of low income kids out of her school. She had brought them in and used full day K as the "carrot" for her own community. As soon as everyone got full day K, she kicked them out.
Mater manipulator.

[Anonymous]

Is there any proof this actually slaughters home values? I highly doubt that’s true and have seen no evidence. Sounds like hyperbolic hysteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most people are not unreasonable. I think in FCPS that lack of transparency has caused a lot of problems. Most people want to stay where they are. Yes, it does affect property values, but I think that school and community loyalty is the bigger issue.

People pay closer attention to what the SB is doing now, but in the past, some boundary redistrictings seemed to come out of nowhere. My community went through a middle and two high school redistrictings over the last twenty years. Two of them involved new schools and did not take anyone by surprise. The third was totally a surprise to our community. We ended up being unaffected, but we had to fight for it. Our property values would not likely have been affected as one option was actually a "better rated" school than the one we are assigned and the other was quite similar. Distance and community were the driving factors to us.

Agree. People in Fairfax also get hot about it because, as far as I know, there's never been a redistricting that has negatively affected a SB member's property values.

I sense a Kathy Smith story ready to be shared.