Boundaries assessment update 2023

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The days of FCPS claiming no high school should have more than 2000 or 2100 kids are long gone. They have expanded many schools well over that number over the past decade and are getting ready to spend $170M to renovate and expand Centreville to 3000.

I cannot remember how old that policy is--but it was written LONG before the 2008 boundary study for South Lakes. In the meantime, they had built Westfield out to a capacity of 3000--after the policy was written. So Stu Gibson was looking for a justification for the South Lakes redistricting and dug it out of the cellar. Neighborhoods had been redistricted to Westfield from Oakton when Westfield was built and it had not been very long. Then, Stu redistricted them to South Lakes with the help of Kathy Smith. There were families who had kids who attended three different high schools while living in the same house. But, the South Lakes PTSA ran the show. There was even evidence of that on Fairfaxunderground--they put their plans on their PTSA website.

Kathy's part was to send kids to Oakton because the membership at Oakton was depleted. And, she lied to communities during the process.

Kathy Smith didn’t really care whether Chantilly kids got moved to Oakton. She went along with Phil Niedzielski-Eichner, who was afraid Oakton teams would suffer with the kids moved to South Lakes.

Yes, she did care. She was tied at the hip with Stu Gibson. He could never have orchestrated that realignment without her help. Westfield was in her district. What, most people do not realize is that Chantilly High was in Springfield district. (It may be different now, but Stringfellow Rd was the dividing line of Springfield and Sully.) Most of the students at Chantilly do live in Sully, however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The days of FCPS claiming no high school should have more than 2000 or 2100 kids are long gone. They have expanded many schools well over that number over the past decade and are getting ready to spend $170M to renovate and expand Centreville to 3000.

I cannot remember how old that policy is--but it was written LONG before the 2008 boundary study for South Lakes. In the meantime, they had built Westfield out to a capacity of 3000--after the policy was written. So Stu Gibson was looking for a justification for the South Lakes redistricting and dug it out of the cellar. Neighborhoods had been redistricted to Westfield from Oakton when Westfield was built and it had not been very long. Then, Stu redistricted them to South Lakes with the help of Kathy Smith. There were families who had kids who attended three different high schools while living in the same house. But, the South Lakes PTSA ran the show. There was even evidence of that on Fairfaxunderground--they put their plans on their PTSA website.

Kathy's part was to send kids to Oakton because the membership at Oakton was depleted. And, she lied to communities during the process.

Kathy Smith didn’t really care whether Chantilly kids got moved to Oakton. She went along with Phil Niedzielski-Eichner, who was afraid Oakton teams would suffer with the kids moved to South Lakes.

Yes, she did care. She was tied at the hip with Stu Gibson. He could never have orchestrated that realignment without her help. Westfield was in her district. What, most people do not realize is that Chantilly High was in Springfield district. (It may be different now, but Stringfellow Rd was the dividing line of Springfield and Sully.) Most of the students at Chantilly do live in Sully, however.

I hear you, and of course there was horse trading going on constantly. But it was Phil who cared the most about moving kids to Oakton if Oakton was going to lose kids to South Lakes.

[Anonymous]

Will be interesting to see what the next School Board has in store. Usually the first two years is when they have the courage to look at boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will be interesting to see what the next School Board has in store. Usually the first two years is when they have the courage to look at boundaries.

If a county-wide redo of the boundaries is really what’s best for capacity balance and transportation efficiency (which would save money), etc.,

It’s actually not unreasonable that a large school system would seek to do a complete overhaul of their boundaries every 25-30 years and minor tweaks every few years (never moving the same neighborhoods/addresses in any given decade)

They should buck up, do it, and be prepared to be voted out if that were the cost.

But they won’t, so people hoping for some sweeping change should give that up.

[Anonymous]

If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

It’s like Trump’s Infrastructure Week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

It’s like Trump’s Infrastructure Week.

LOL. In any case, when FCPS staff is allowed to make reference to a new school in official documents for so many years and then do virtually nothing to make it happen, it reflects both the incompetence of the planning staff (and of Platenberg in particular; Fanshaw is an improvement) and that there's no meaningful oversight from the School Board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

No one has yet shown how this could be done.

Agree on the rest of your comment. But, I think the big cog in the wheel was when they gave away the Carson site for the Western High school.
And, then came up with Hutchison site which is absolutely a terrible, terrible idea on so many levels.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

No one has yet shown how this could be done.

Agree on the rest of your comment. But, I think the big cog in the wheel was when they gave away the Carson site for the Western High school.
And, then came up with Hutchison site which is absolutely a terrible, terrible idea on so many levels.

Maybe that's part of the issue. They didn't want to admit they screwed the pooch by transferring the site near Carson to the Saudis so they've engaged in the fiction for years they'll be able to find some other suitable site. Meanwhile they continue to expand schools, which makes it less likely a new school is needed, and it only becomes harder over time to identify an appropriate alternative site. And by the time they deal with reality those responsible for the transfer will be drawing a pension and/or enjoying life on a beach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

No one has yet shown how this could be done.

Agree on the rest of your comment. But, I think the big cog in the wheel was when they gave away the Carson site for the Western High school.
And, then came up with Hutchison site which is absolutely a terrible, terrible idea on so many levels.

Maybe that's part of the issue. They didn't want to admit they screwed the pooch by transferring the site near Carson to the Saudis so they've engaged in the fiction for years they'll be able to find some other suitable site. Meanwhile they continue to expand schools, which makes it less likely a new school is needed, and it only becomes harder over time to identify an appropriate alternative site. And by the time they deal with reality those responsible for the transfer will be drawing a pension and/or enjoying life on a beach.

I suspect there was GREAT pressure to release the Carson site to the Saudis from way above the School Board. It was supposed to be built in Burke and the community reacted. When they gave the Carson site to the Saudis there was NO community involvement for those living near Carson. NONE! I suspect the BOS made the decision--not the SB. And, I wouldn't be surprised if the State Dept did not play a hand in this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

No one has yet shown how this could be done.

Agree on the rest of your comment. But, I think the big cog in the wheel was when they gave away the Carson site for the Western High school.
And, then came up with Hutchison site which is absolutely a terrible, terrible idea on so many levels.

Maybe that's part of the issue. They didn't want to admit they screwed the pooch by transferring the site near Carson to the Saudis so they've engaged in the fiction for years they'll be able to find some other suitable site. Meanwhile they continue to expand schools, which makes it less likely a new school is needed, and it only becomes harder over time to identify an appropriate alternative site. And by the time they deal with reality those responsible for the transfer will be drawing a pension and/or enjoying life on a beach.

I suspect there was GREAT pressure to release the Carson site to the Saudis from way above the School Board. It was supposed to be built in Burke and the community reacted. When they gave the Carson site to the Saudis there was NO community involvement for those living near Carson. NONE! I suspect the BOS made the decision--not the SB. And, I wouldn't be surprised if the State Dept did not play a hand in this.

It hasn't aged well on any front, between FCPS's deception about building a new school and the notion of doing special favors for those responsible for Khashoggi's brutal death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they take a fresh look at how they are spending the capital budget and whether a 3% FARMS high school with a boundary adjacent to a 50% FARMS high school is even remotely consistent with their commitment to equity, it will be an improvement.

Also, they would gain instant credibility if they dealt with the "plan" for a "new western HS" once and for all. Kill it if it's not happening and take it out of the next Capital Improvement Program entirely; set up a dedicated web page that tracks the steps being taken to make it happen if it's not a joke.

They should absolutely be serious about the Western high school. Do it, or don’t. (Iirc it was projected to have been completed several years ago)

As for the fairness of a low FARMs boundary bordering a high one, nothing in the One Fairfax document states that part of providing access to a good education states that schools may not differ substantially in the wealth of the parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We all know what the “remove Western Great Falls from Langley” is really about.

Never going to happen, which the last few years have shown.

PP was right that there may have been a time when both Route 7 and Georgetown Pike were less crowded, Herndon was over capacity, Langley had space, and it made sense to send kids west of Springvale Road to Langley.

That was 30 years ago. Now those roads are more congested with commuters heading east from Loudoun, Herndon has been expanded and has space, and Langley could be taking more Tysons kids.

If the next Dranesville School Board member is from Herndon (Robyn Lady), not Great Falls, I could see her pushing through a boundary change. It's not like other members would stop her if she thought it made sense.

.

You are so cute!

Could definitely see Robyn Lady wiping that smug smile off your face!

Are you the same person that gleefully affirmed that every thing would change when Elaine Tholen took over from Strauss?

How’s that working out?

Say what?

Lady is from Herndon so her perspective is likely to be rather different than Tholen’s.

Uh huh.

And we were told Tholen would be different from Strauss (who actually did try to boundary some apartments for Langley and was shot down by most of the board who wanted to redraw boundaries countywide. They folded shortly before the election when they saw public wasn’t having it. Since they cared more about getting re-elected than the principles they so nobly expressed in their work sessions, they backed down).

Maybe this time a Dranesville rep will finally bring some joy to your life.

If not, find a hobby or get a cat.

So if I understand correctly the only consistent thing about the School Board is its inconsistency. All the more reason to think Lady may have a different take on things than Tholen.

Also, I sense some projection in your post. Our lives are already full of both joy and fur.

The jokes write themselves.

Bless your heart.

And may the safety pins holding together what passes for your brain be strengthened when the next Dranesville representative fails you.

We don’t want the next disappointment over boundaries to cause a psychotic break.

In the name of sky daddy, the forest dryads and the spirits of the Potomac River,

Amen.

Sounds like you’ll need to take out a second mortgage to pay for all your therapy.

You could at least try to make your comebacks less pathetically ordinary.

Then again, you probably can’t.

You are as basic as it gets, so not worth the keystrokes.

But do keep lashing out. Everyone else can see it’s fear about your bubble bursting some day.

Not everyone bases their happiness on school boundaries.

In all seriousness, I hope you don’t display this bitterness to your children, poisoning their enjoyment of what is likely a perfectly good school(s).

The Langley pyramid is far from the only good one in the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We all know what the “remove Western Great Falls from Langley” is really about.

Never going to happen, which the last few years have shown.

PP was right that there may have been a time when both Route 7 and Georgetown Pike were less crowded, Herndon was over capacity, Langley had space, and it made sense to send kids west of Springvale Road to Langley.

That was 30 years ago. Now those roads are more congested with commuters heading east from Loudoun, Herndon has been expanded and has space, and Langley could be taking more Tysons kids.

If the next Dranesville School Board member is from Herndon (Robyn Lady), not Great Falls, I could see her pushing through a boundary change. It's not like other members would stop her if she thought it made sense.

.

You are so cute!

Could definitely see Robyn Lady wiping that smug smile off your face!

Are you the same person that gleefully affirmed that every thing would change when Elaine Tholen took over from Strauss?

How’s that working out?

Say what?

Lady is from Herndon so her perspective is likely to be rather different than Tholen’s.

Uh huh.

And we were told Tholen would be different from Strauss (who actually did try to boundary some apartments for Langley and was shot down by most of the board who wanted to redraw boundaries countywide. They folded shortly before the election when they saw public wasn’t having it. Since they cared more about getting re-elected than the principles they so nobly expressed in their work sessions, they backed down).

Maybe this time a Dranesville rep will finally bring some joy to your life.

If not, find a hobby or get a cat.

So if I understand correctly the only consistent thing about the School Board is its inconsistency. All the more reason to think Lady may have a different take on things than Tholen.

Also, I sense some projection in your post. Our lives are already full of both joy and fur.

The jokes write themselves.

Bless your heart.

And may the safety pins holding together what passes for your brain be strengthened when the next Dranesville representative fails you.

We don’t want the next disappointment over boundaries to cause a psychotic break.

In the name of sky daddy, the forest dryads and the spirits of the Potomac River,

Amen.

Sounds like you’ll need to take out a second mortgage to pay for all your therapy.

You could at least try to make your comebacks less pathetically ordinary.

Then again, you probably can’t.

You are as basic as it gets, so not worth the keystrokes.

But do keep lashing out. Everyone else can see it’s fear about your bubble bursting some day.

Not everyone bases their happiness on school boundaries.

In all seriousness, I hope you don’t display this bitterness to your children, poisoning their enjoyment of what is likely a perfectly good school(s).

The Langley pyramid is far from the only good one in the county.

I live in a boundary of a school that is quite different from Langley. I would be extremely upset if FCPS sent us to another school. Why do you not understand that Langley parents feel the same way? They like their school and there does not appear to be any good reason to move them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We all know what the “remove Western Great Falls from Langley” is really about.

Never going to happen, which the last few years have shown.

PP was right that there may have been a time when both Route 7 and Georgetown Pike were less crowded, Herndon was over capacity, Langley had space, and it made sense to send kids west of Springvale Road to Langley.

That was 30 years ago. Now those roads are more congested with commuters heading east from Loudoun, Herndon has been expanded and has space, and Langley could be taking more Tysons kids.

If the next Dranesville School Board member is from Herndon (Robyn Lady), not Great Falls, I could see her pushing through a boundary change. It's not like other members would stop her if she thought it made sense.

.

You are so cute!

Could definitely see Robyn Lady wiping that smug smile off your face!

Are you the same person that gleefully affirmed that every thing would change when Elaine Tholen took over from Strauss?

How’s that working out?

Say what?

Lady is from Herndon so her perspective is likely to be rather different than Tholen’s.

Uh huh.

And we were told Tholen would be different from Strauss (who actually did try to boundary some apartments for Langley and was shot down by most of the board who wanted to redraw boundaries countywide. They folded shortly before the election when they saw public wasn’t having it. Since they cared more about getting re-elected than the principles they so nobly expressed in their work sessions, they backed down).

Maybe this time a Dranesville rep will finally bring some joy to your life.

If not, find a hobby or get a cat.

So if I understand correctly the only consistent thing about the School Board is its inconsistency. All the more reason to think Lady may have a different take on things than Tholen.

Also, I sense some projection in your post. Our lives are already full of both joy and fur.

The jokes write themselves.

Bless your heart.

And may the safety pins holding together what passes for your brain be strengthened when the next Dranesville representative fails you.

We don’t want the next disappointment over boundaries to cause a psychotic break.

In the name of sky daddy, the forest dryads and the spirits of the Potomac River,

Amen.

Sounds like you’ll need to take out a second mortgage to pay for all your therapy.

You could at least try to make your comebacks less pathetically ordinary.

Then again, you probably can’t.

You are as basic as it gets, so not worth the keystrokes.

But do keep lashing out. Everyone else can see it’s fear about your bubble bursting some day.

Not everyone bases their happiness on school boundaries.

In all seriousness, I hope you don’t display this bitterness to your children, poisoning their enjoyment of what is likely a perfectly good school(s).

The Langley pyramid is far from the only good one in the county.

I live in a boundary of a school that is quite different from Langley. I would be extremely upset if FCPS sent us to another school. Why do you not understand that Langley parents feel the same way? They like their school and there does not appear to be any good reason to move them.

The fact that there are now other closer schools with capacity is a good reason. Why should people have to pay to bus kids 10-13 miles to Langley?