FCPS comprehensive boundary review

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of proposals to send middle class kids to bad schools, but a total absence of proposals to send more FARMS and ELL kids to the better high schools. Either there will be a surprise, or this will be limousine liberalism at its finest

Maybe they will send some Tysons apartments zoned for McLean and Marshall to Langley now that Elaine Tholen isn’t around any longer to police Langley’s boundaries to keep any FARMS kids out.

That’d be great. Would lower the FARMs at Marshall and McLean!

Turns out the only way to solve the rampant farms at some schools is to bus poor kids.

Those are the types of changes to are easier to implement without bussing kids long distances than moving Justice kids to Madison.

Langley can accommodate the attendance island and not be overcrowded. No need for further moves in that neck of the woods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of proposals to send middle class kids to bad schools, but a total absence of proposals to send more FARMS and ELL kids to the better high schools. Either there will be a surprise, or this will be limousine liberalism at its finest

Maybe they will send some Tysons apartments zoned for McLean and Marshall to Langley now that Elaine Tholen isn’t around any longer to police Langley’s boundaries to keep any FARMS kids out.

That’d be great. Would lower the FARMs at Marshall and McLean!

Turns out the only way to solve the rampant farms at some schools is to bus poor kids.

Those are the types of changes to are easier to implement without bussing kids long distances than moving Justice kids to Madison.

Specifically changes that leave Langley, McLean, Madison and Oakton with almost not ELL or FARMS kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the sense that Gatehouse told its employees to stop the inflammatory boundary change advocacy on DCUM since we are so close to the election.

They’re scared about what the boundary changes will do to politics in our area. As they should be. It’ll be like the San Francisco and Portland backlash to too liberal policies.

Or maybe, despite what you believe, there are actually lots of actual parents who support this review and the SB’s efforts.

That’s what SB members and their cronies would have you believe but the outreach conducted by the prior consultant confirmed that most parents engaged enough to weigh in oppose major boundary changes.

You mean the data from the pre-pandemic outreach? Things have changed since then, in case you haven’t noticed.

To be fair, I’m guessing there has probably been very little impact to your school community since Covid. I wish mine and other families could say the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the sense that Gatehouse told its employees to stop the inflammatory boundary change advocacy on DCUM since we are so close to the election.

They’re scared about what the boundary changes will do to politics in our area. As they should be. It’ll be like the San Francisco and Portland backlash to too liberal policies.

Or maybe, despite what you believe, there are actually lots of actual parents who support this review and the SB’s efforts.

That’s what SB members and their cronies would have you believe but the outreach conducted by the prior consultant confirmed that most parents engaged enough to weigh in oppose major boundary changes.

You mean the data from the pre-pandemic outreach? Things have changed since then, in case you haven’t noticed.

To be fair, I’m guessing there has probably been very little impact to your school community since Covid. I wish mine and other families could say the same.

So you’re banking on parents now being okay with massive disruptions in their kids lives in the name of equity?

How naïve of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

Piecemeal changes address actual problems. Comprehensive changes address equity.

Unnecessary disruption.

[Anonymous]

Exactly what this poster said. Dang, people on this site aren't into nuance much!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the sense that Gatehouse told its employees to stop the inflammatory boundary change advocacy on DCUM since we are so close to the election.

They’re scared about what the boundary changes will do to politics in our area. As they should be. It’ll be like the San Francisco and Portland backlash to too liberal policies.

Or maybe, despite what you believe, there are actually lots of actual parents who support this review and the SB’s efforts.

That’s what SB members and their cronies would have you believe but the outreach conducted by the prior consultant confirmed that most parents engaged enough to weigh in oppose major boundary changes.

You mean the data from the pre-pandemic outreach? Things have changed since then, in case you haven’t noticed.

To be fair, I’m guessing there has probably been very little impact to your school community since Covid. I wish mine and other families could say the same.

So you’re banking on parents now being okay with massive disruptions in their kids lives in the name of equity?

How naïve of you.

You mean in the same way that you are banking on things staying the same, forever?

How hypocritical of you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

Piecemeal changes address actual problems. Comprehensive changes address equity.

Unnecessary disruption.

Lucky you then. They are doing a piecemeal boundary change to achieve equity under the guise of a comprehensive boundary review. There is no way they are touching anyone else's boundaries except for Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon. They just can't outright say that because they would get massive blowback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

Piecemeal changes address actual problems. Comprehensive changes address equity.

Unnecessary disruption.

Lucky you then. They are doing a piecemeal boundary change to achieve equity under the guise of a comprehensive boundary review. There is no way they are touching anyone else's boundaries except for Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon. They just can't outright say that because they would get massive blowback.

Are you calling Dunne a liar? He said last recorded school board meeting that every pyramid would be impacted.

Womp womp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

Piecemeal changes address actual problems. Comprehensive changes address equity.

Unnecessary disruption.

Lucky you then. They are doing a piecemeal boundary change to achieve equity under the guise of a comprehensive boundary review. There is no way they are touching anyone else's boundaries except for Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon. They just can't outright say that because they would get massive blowback.

Are you calling Dunne a liar? He said last recorded school board meeting that every pyramid would be impacted.

Womp womp.

I hate to break it to you but sometimes elected officials lie.

The best they may do is give pyramids a cursory look to check the box before doing exactly what they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

Piecemeal changes address actual problems. Comprehensive changes address equity.

Unnecessary disruption.

Lucky you then. They are doing a piecemeal boundary change to achieve equity under the guise of a comprehensive boundary review. There is no way they are touching anyone else's boundaries except for Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon. They just can't outright say that because they would get massive blowback.

Are you calling Dunne a liar? He said last recorded school board meeting that every pyramid would be impacted.

Womp womp.

Does anyone really think the demographics at the rich schools will change?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the sense that Gatehouse told its employees to stop the inflammatory boundary change advocacy on DCUM since we are so close to the election.

They’re scared about what the boundary changes will do to politics in our area. As they should be. It’ll be like the San Francisco and Portland backlash to too liberal policies.

Or maybe, despite what you believe, there are actually lots of actual parents who support this review and the SB’s efforts.

That’s what SB members and their cronies would have you believe but the outreach conducted by the prior consultant confirmed that most parents engaged enough to weigh in oppose major boundary changes.

You mean the data from the pre-pandemic outreach? Things have changed since then, in case you haven’t noticed.

To be fair, I’m guessing there has probably been very little impact to your school community since Covid. I wish mine and other families could say the same.

So you’re banking on parents now being okay with massive disruptions in their kids lives in the name of equity?

How naïve of you.

You mean in the same way that you are banking on things staying the same, forever?

How hypocritical of you.

I’m sorry, I’m not following your argument here. Are you saying parents are hypocritical for not wanting the school board to move their kids for equity purposes?

I’m not sure that word means what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

Piecemeal changes address actual problems. Comprehensive changes address equity.

Unnecessary disruption.

Lucky you then. They are doing a piecemeal boundary change to achieve equity under the guise of a comprehensive boundary review. There is no way they are touching anyone else's boundaries except for Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon. They just can't outright say that because they would get massive blowback.

Are you calling Dunne a liar? He said last recorded school board meeting that every pyramid would be impacted.

Womp womp.

Does anyone really think the demographics at the rich schools will change?

Fair. Langley parents likely won't let that happen. WSHS parents aren't rich enough to stop it from happening

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line to all of these discussions seems to be: If I bought in WSHS pyramid, I'm against boundary changes and if I bought in Lewis pyramid, I'm for and can think of all the justifications for/against in either scenario. Honestly though, the boundaries haven't changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change.

The bolded is a lie being told by the school board.

The entire area from West Springfield, Lake Braddock, Lewis (then Lee) and Hayfield was completely rezoned when South County opened in 2005.

Using "they haven't been rezoned since the early 80s" as one of the justifications for rezoning those 22150, 22151, 22152 and 22153 neighborhoods is very disingenuous, if not an outright lie

OK, fair point, PP should have said "the boundaries haven't been comprehensively changed since the 80s and there has been a lot of growth and change. Have there been piecemeal changes along the way in some pyramids? Sure. But that's not the same as taking a system-wide look at things.

Piecemeal changes address actual problems. Comprehensive changes address equity.

Unnecessary disruption.

Lucky you then. They are doing a piecemeal boundary change to achieve equity under the guise of a comprehensive boundary review. There is no way they are touching anyone else's boundaries except for Lewis/WSHS and Langley/Herndon. They just can't outright say that because they would get massive blowback.

Are you calling Dunne a liar? He said last recorded school board meeting that every pyramid would be impacted.

Womp womp.

Does anyone really think the demographics at the rich schools will change?

They really can’t. The richest schools are surrounded by rich areas. Maybe there’s a somewhat run down complex in the boundaries, but even the rents there will be unaffordable compared to the much cheaper places in Springfield and Alexandria. Likewise the low income areas are generally surrounded by other low income areas, and the higher income pockets have enough money and options to go to private/religious schools or just move, or enough know-how to get a pupil placement or AAP or what have you.