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]It is so puzzling that that Sangster neighborhood is upset about being rezoned to... Lake Braddock of all places.

[/quote]

It’s so puzzling that others feel the need to tell neighborhoods how they should feel about being moved from a school community— one that they are well established in. [/quote]

It’s puzzling that Sangster families feel the need to complain about going to Lake Braddock when other neighborhoods around, including those in Hunt Valley, Daventry and West Springfield elementary could be moved to Lewis. Those neighborhoods also feel part of the WSHS community but they could be moved to the other side of the mixing bowl. [/quote]
So Sangster parents should fall on their swords for the greater good? Hunt Valley was offered South County and they rejected it. Nobody wants to leave WSHS, of course they’re going to fight to stay. [/quote]

That Sangster neighborhood was marked to attend Lake Braddock in all versions of the maps.  Map 1 and Map 2 were never meant to be stand alone maps.  Maps 1 and 2 each showed the 2 different priorities BRAC was taxed with, one of which was eliminating split feeders.  Map 3 combined those 2 directives into a single map that represented maps 1 & 2 combined into a single format.

It is misleading to imply that Hunt Valley and Sangster were swapped.

Sangster was always marked to leave WSHS for LBSS.

In fact, part of Sangster off Hooes Rd was selected to get rezoned to South County.  The BRAC committee has been helping Sangster families, because that Sangster neighborhood rezoning was reversed.  So don't say that BRAC is not doing their jobs or not helping Sangster families.

The BRAC reps have to recommend maps, or Reid is going to pick.  They are doing a great job trying to follow their directives and keep as many neighborhoods as intact as possible and as much within their community as possible.  Lake Braddock is part of the Sangster community.[/quote]

It actually sounds like HV and Sangster should work together on this.  BRAC actually recommended to keep that Sangster neighborhood to stay at WS.  There was a scenario that was shown to BRAC keeping both HV and Sangster at WS.  But the public Scenerio 4 map moved the Sangster kids out because somehow Rolling Valley got moved in.  That was not a BRAC recommendation and came as a total surprise.  If RV is kept at Lewis would Sangster be able to remain at WS per the BRAC recommendation? [/quote]

That scenario that showed the 2 schools staying at WSHS was not a stand alone map.

It was I think Map 1, which was just showing the work the Thru did on that specific mandate where they worked on attendance islands, including the Sangster island.  It was the first layer for the actual map, Map 3.

The other map focused on eliminating split feeders (Sangster split feeder to Lake Braddock and Rolling Valley split feeder to Saratoga ) and other shifts that Thru suggested, which created new split feeders (half of Hunt Valley to South County) which was not supposed to occur because Thru was tasked with eliminating split feeders, nor creating split feeders.

Map 1 and Map 2 were just the 2 layers. Map 3 combined these mandates into a single map, which is the actual map[/quote]

The Region 4 BRAC (like many other regions) recommended that the split was not an issue and that if room allowed (after keeping HV at Sangster).  It is listed on the grid in #8.  Thur listened to the BRAC on keeping many other slips across the board ..why not this one?[/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