FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

At this point it doesn’t matter. Look at the recommendations their consultant came up with and it’s hard to imagine we could ever have a more incompetent superintendent or school board.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

At this point it doesn’t matter. Look at the recommendations their consultant came up with and it’s hard to imagine we could ever have a more incompetent superintendent or school board.

Our area was not touched in the discussions about split feeders, attendance islands, etc. Once Thru created scenarios, everything changed & the response from the SB was cold and, “oh well”. It’s crazy to me, because this is an outside consulting firm who doesn’t know our neighborhood dynamics. It’s sending kids to schools that are further away. Much of what it decided is nonsense and the board isn’t even questioning it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

I'm one of the frequent WSHS posters and I'm not against the idea of boundary change. But you need to be targeted and solving an actual problem, like the Coates situation. The community needs to be behind the change and there needs to be liberal "phasing" (i.e. grandfathering) for families. That's what they've done in the past and despite their whole "we haven't changed boundaries in 40 years" spiel, they have changed boundaries for schools. Many times. This whole process seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Whatever their original intent was (moving kids so they could find space for universal pre-K; moving kids to even out FARMS rates), they've stepped back from that in the light of intense community pushback. The question is what they'll end up proposing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

At this point it doesn’t matter. Look at the recommendations their consultant came up with and it’s hard to imagine we could ever have a more incompetent superintendent or school board.

Our area was not touched in the discussions about split feeders, attendance islands, etc. Once Thru created scenarios, everything changed & the response from the SB was cold and, “oh well”. It’s crazy to me, because this is an outside consulting firm who doesn’t know our neighborhood dynamics. It’s sending kids to schools that are further away. Much of what it decided is nonsense and the board isn’t even questioning it.

Yes, the consultant is garbage and clearly doesn’t know the county or the neighborhood dynamics. But it’s the School Board that wanted to farm out a county-wide boundary review that never made sense in the first place (too complicated) to an outside consultant and Reid that retained an incompetent consulting firm that isn’t up to the talk.

They need to be held accountable - and certainly not rewarded with higher positions of authority (see Moon and Sizemore-Heizer now vying for a seat on the board of supervisors when their political careers really ought to be over).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

I'm one of the frequent WSHS posters and I'm not against the idea of boundary change. But you need to be targeted and solving an actual problem, like the Coates situation. The community needs to be behind the change and there needs to be liberal "phasing" (i.e. grandfathering) for families. That's what they've done in the past and despite their whole "we haven't changed boundaries in 40 years" spiel, they have changed boundaries for schools. Many times. This whole process seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Whatever their original intent was (moving kids so they could find space for universal pre-K; moving kids to even out FARMS rates), they've stepped back from that in the light of intense community pushback. The question is what they'll end up proposing.

You know the problem being solved for WSHS is overcrowding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

I'm one of the frequent WSHS posters and I'm not against the idea of boundary change. But you need to be targeted and solving an actual problem, like the Coates situation. The community needs to be behind the change and there needs to be liberal "phasing" (i.e. grandfathering) for families. That's what they've done in the past and despite their whole "we haven't changed boundaries in 40 years" spiel, they have changed boundaries for schools. Many times. This whole process seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Whatever their original intent was (moving kids so they could find space for universal pre-K; moving kids to even out FARMS rates), they've stepped back from that in the light of intense community pushback. The question is what they'll end up proposing.

You know the problem being solved for WSHS is overcrowding.

Is there new construction in the boundary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

I'm one of the frequent WSHS posters and I'm not against the idea of boundary change. But you need to be targeted and solving an actual problem, like the Coates situation. The community needs to be behind the change and there needs to be liberal "phasing" (i.e. grandfathering) for families. That's what they've done in the past and despite their whole "we haven't changed boundaries in 40 years" spiel, they have changed boundaries for schools. Many times. This whole process seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Whatever their original intent was (moving kids so they could find space for universal pre-K; moving kids to even out FARMS rates), they've stepped back from that in the light of intense community pushback. The question is what they'll end up proposing.

You know the problem being solved for WSHS is overcrowding.

It's not overcrowded and the CIP numbers in all of the ES schools are falling, not rising. There is no new construction inside the boundary. But maybe WSHS is being targeted so someone can move the small number of Rolling Valley kids in really nice houses to WSHS and out of Lewis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

I'm one of the frequent WSHS posters and I'm not against the idea of boundary change. But you need to be targeted and solving an actual problem, like the Coates situation. The community needs to be behind the change and there needs to be liberal "phasing" (i.e. grandfathering) for families. That's what they've done in the past and despite their whole "we haven't changed boundaries in 40 years" spiel, they have changed boundaries for schools. Many times. This whole process seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Whatever their original intent was (moving kids so they could find space for universal pre-K; moving kids to even out FARMS rates), they've stepped back from that in the light of intense community pushback. The question is what they'll end up proposing.

You know the problem being solved for WSHS is overcrowding.

But is this a continuous issue if we look years and a decade into the future? Where is that data? There are no new communities being built within boundary. They need to stop allowing transfers. They need to prove that the overcrowding will continue (class of ‘25 was very large as a cohort and numbers go down in future classes in general, not just WSHS). They are also suggesting to move small pockets out in order to accommodate kids from Lewis. How does that help?

[Anonymous]

When they didn’t propose to move any Langley kids to Herndon or West Springfield kids to Lewis it became clear this boundary study was total bullshit. Apart from dealing with Coates they should call it all off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When they didn’t propose to move any Langley kids to Herndon or West Springfield kids to Lewis it became clear this boundary study was total bullshit. Apart from dealing with Coates they should call it all off.

Equity warriors bring down the entire system. They suck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When they didn’t propose to move any Langley kids to Herndon or West Springfield kids to Lewis it became clear this boundary study was total bullshit. Apart from dealing with Coates they should call it all off.

Equity warriors bring down the entire system. They suck.

They started off as equity warriors and evolved into bumbling meddlers pushing unwanted solutions to fake problems. Meanwhile the few situations crying out for action remain unaddressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

I'm one of the frequent WSHS posters and I'm not against the idea of boundary change. But you need to be targeted and solving an actual problem, like the Coates situation. The community needs to be behind the change and there needs to be liberal "phasing" (i.e. grandfathering) for families. That's what they've done in the past and despite their whole "we haven't changed boundaries in 40 years" spiel, they have changed boundaries for schools. Many times. This whole process seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Whatever their original intent was (moving kids so they could find space for universal pre-K; moving kids to even out FARMS rates), they've stepped back from that in the light of intense community pushback. The question is what they'll end up proposing.

You know the problem being solved for WSHS is overcrowding.

Except it’s not that overcrowded and that can be solved by looking at pupil placements and transfers. Why should those kids get to stay and my kids in boundary need to leave?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Above all else, it’s the arrogance of the school board members that really angers me. They heard from us five years ago when they tried to change boundaries that we don’t want them moved. But throughout the whole process, they continue to ignore public opinion on boundaries.

It’s the, “we know best” and “we are hearing from people who want this, trust me”. That gets me. When asked if our board member was hearing from people in our boundary that wanted this, she changed the subject to another neighborhood. Why? Because no one that I’ve come across in our small pocket wants this unnecessary change. We aren’t the only neighborhood in her constituency with a similar response.

They haven’t even identified the problem they are trying to solve by redistricting.

What is their WHY?

I'm one of the frequent WSHS posters and I'm not against the idea of boundary change. But you need to be targeted and solving an actual problem, like the Coates situation. The community needs to be behind the change and there needs to be liberal "phasing" (i.e. grandfathering) for families. That's what they've done in the past and despite their whole "we haven't changed boundaries in 40 years" spiel, they have changed boundaries for schools. Many times. This whole process seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Whatever their original intent was (moving kids so they could find space for universal pre-K; moving kids to even out FARMS rates), they've stepped back from that in the light of intense community pushback. The question is what they'll end up proposing.

FCPS also needs to confirm residency with utility bulls or leases before rezoning any school