Reply to Boundary Review Meetings

Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)

Reply to "Boundary Review Meetings"

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]Is there evidence of the donor connection that can be brought up at the boundary meeting ?[/quote]

I am not a fan of that particular school board rep, but that accusation is either an unfounded rumor, or a poorly worded sarcasm attempt that got picked up online and stuck.[/quote]

I don't want to add fuel to the fire on this one, but I actually heard the 'donor' is a wealthy attorney in Sandy's neighborhood who pushed FCPS to have every single holiday off.  [/quote]

Sandy's neighborhood is not Rolling Valley.

I am not a fan of that rep.

But there needs to be proof before pushing a serious, unfounded rumor like this.

I agree that her fixation on that Rolling Valley neighborhood is absurd.

That neighborhood going to WSHS from Lewis was not on any of the maps.

[b]It was not on any of the Brac committee recommendations from a few weeks ago.[/b]

It was not something that the Franconia school board rep is asking for, or something the Lewis community needs.

The numbers used are ignoring all the high school students from that neighborhood who pupil place out of Lewis to LB, Edison, SoCo or other schools, so they are inaccurate and undercounted.

Based on the overcrowding at WSHS, rezoning this neighborhood does not make sense, especially since neither Thru nor BRAC recommended it.

Based on geography, the move does make sense, but then we circle back to overcrowding at WSHS and underenrollment at Lewis, and it ceases to make sense.

I think though that without proof, to keep repeating that rumor is at best, unhelpful, even though the whole laser sharp fixation on getting that Lewis neighborhood from Lewis to WSHS has been SAs #1 priority since the school board started revising policy 8130 over a year ago, amd likely the reason why Anderson pushed so hard for this county wide rezoning.[/quote]
But it was. Read priority 7 from region 6:
 https://www.fcps.edu/system/files/forms/2025-09/advisory_priority_analysis_-_region_6_9-8_update_epg1_0.pdf[/quote]

Wasn't priority 7 below other priorities asking to move more kids into Lewis?

Skipping priorities 1-6 and jumping to priority 7 is a slap in the face to Lewis families.[/quote]

Agreed. Also, who writes the 'Analysis of Recommendation' columns in the linked PDF? They're literally saying the quiet part out loud that WSHS is good, Lewis is cr*p, but what ARE THEY DOING TO FIX IT????

"Advisory Update 9/8/25 o It’s worth noting that for priority #6 and the accompanying proposed map that was submitted, that we are not committed to that specific neighborhood, and understand that new boundary proposals for ANY neighborhood from WS into Lewis would create massive uproar and don’t significantly address over/under capacity issues at WS/Lewis"

And how would shifting neighborhoods not fix capacity issues? Do they assume everyone would just try to transfer back into WSHS?[/quote]
If it doesn’t have a change log line associated with it, THRU did not do it. And in many cases, they saw the word “revert” and undid the changes without implementing any other recommendations.

They are clearly over the process. Remember Parklawn? The other elementary school which had their 2024-25 boundary study canceled along with Coates. They were supposed to be prioritized in the adjustment. Look at scenario 4. Boundaries are exactly the same as they exist today. [/quote]

They did make significant adjustments to Coates which would now put them at 96% occupancy after moving kids to Floris, Herndon ES and McNair[/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