Reply to Amendments to Policy 8130 re Grandfathering of Current Students

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Amendments to Policy 8130 re Grandfathering of Current Students"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]What’s crazy is that this amendment wouldn’t even apply to this round of boundary changes because of KAA.

From the proposed amendment: These allowances shall not be applicable in the opening of a new school, or in the closing of an existing school.

If that new school gets opened fall of 2026, then the grandfathering wouldn’t apply.[/quote]
To students zoned to KAA. There are many recommended adjustments to high school boundaries that are not related to KAA. [/quote]

That’s open to interpretation - the amendment is not drafted well.[/quote]
Okay, yeah. If the school board is full of mustache twirling villains (which many on this board believe) then yes, absolutely, they’ll pass the amendment to lull people into a false sense of compromise and then snatch away grandfathering on a technicality. [/quote]

I don’t think that’s the issue. The proposed amendment is explicit that grandfathering wouldn’t necessarily apply to boundary changes associated with the opening or closing of a school.

Assuming they reopen KAA as a neighborhood HS, the most likely scenario is that it opens as 9-11 school the first year, with no grandfathering.  They’ll want to get it up and running.  The next year it will then be a 9-12 school.

For other boundary changes, they’d grandfather students in grades 10-12 but you’d apparently have to provide your own transportation. That favors wealthier kids and would mean a lot more cars on the streets near the high schools.  That’s could be pretty crazy at some schools where there is already limited parking. [/quote]

It does not mean more high school drivers because those high school students are already driving to their neighborhood high school.[/quote]

Some are and some aren't.  The one thing that is absolutely clear is that there would be more teen drivers on the roads if they revise boundaries every five years and then phase in each set of changes through grandfathering without transportation.  [/quote]

I’m not following your logic.  Most of the kids stop taking the school bus and start driving asap. These kids are driving anyway, they don’t use the cheese wagon as we so lovingly called it in high school. [/quote]

It's funny how you generalize from your own experience to the entire county.  But, hey, the School Board depends on enablers like you, so post away.  [/quote]

What’s with the name calling? Argue the point, not the person.[/quote]

That is the point:  PP is making a broad, yet inaccurate, generalization based on her own observation.  It's been pointed out by others that it's not universally the case that "everyone" in grades 10-12 drives, yet she ignores this and repeats the lie.

It's back to the same type of School Board shilling we saw months ago.  [/quote]

Yes. If you are generalizing then you haven’t had any high school drivers yet. My 4th is a rising junior and no license yet. And when she does, no car and no spot in the lot. I’ve had a senior need to take the bus before. It is simply not true that every licensed teen has a car and access to a safe parking spot or rides with friends. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics