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][quote=Anonymous]They either need to go with Map 4 moving Sangster and Shannon station to Lake Braddock, or leave WSHS alone for the next 5 years.

BRAC gave them a very good map.  Map 4 was fair, reasonable, met all the mandates in the least disruptive way possible, and solved the WSHS overcrowding.

Reid rejected a perfectly good map that would have gixed WSHS.

The only change she should have made to Map 4 was keeping SPA 8922 at Lewis.[/quote]

You keep mentioning BRAC. Region 4 BRAC recommended the changes to map 4 based on updates numbers and community feedback.  Reid adopted their recommendations for region 4. Moving those Sangster kids moved like 16 kids per class (it did almost zero in lowering any numbers, and moving RV at Lewis negated any 'numbers' in savings.  I also believe that neighborhood has been busting its butt to prevent any neighborhoods in WS to be moved out.  The target has moved and Reid will need to focus on a larger area to get WSHS under 115%.  Or, neighborhoods unite together and keep pressure on Sandy to keep it off the vague 'watchlist' and into boundary cycle outlined by their own policy.  [/quote]

Reid rejected Map 4 for WSHS.

In Reid's map:

* Sangster split feeder did not get moved to Lake Braddock.  Sangster was left at WSHS, leaving over 60 students at WSHS that should have been moved to Lake Braddock.

* The most obvious move from Map 4, sending the Keene Mill island all the way on the other side of the boundary, Shannon Station, Blarney Stone, and a few other streets, to White Oaks and Lake Braddock was nixed by Reid.  Instead, Reid moved all those Shannon Station townhouses to overcrowded Cardinal Forest, then moved Cardinal Forest homes that were walkable to CF to Keene Mill.  This was around 18 students per grade, close to 120 elemementary students and around 70 high school students total.**

* Map 4 moved Rolling Valley SPA 8922 into WSHS from Lewis.  Reid rejected this change temporarily,  putting SPA 8922 on a mid cycle review to be looked at for rezoning to WSHS in January 2027.

Combined, the Sangster and Shannon Station recommendations from Map 4 removed around 130 students from WSHS, close to 5% of the students.

Combined with class of 2026 graduating, WSHS would be around the target of 105% capacity by adopting Map 4 rezoning Sangster and Shannon Station to Lake Braddock, and rejecting Map 4 moving SPA 8922 Rolling Valley Key Lewis into WSHS, leaving them at Lewis and Key.

Dr. Reid should have kept the majority of Map 4, rejecting only the Rolling Valley SPA 8922 move.

The school board should override Dr. Reid and adopt the Map 4 moved out of WSHS,  and freezing any moves into WSHS.

** The Shannon Station townhouse community is slightly smaller than the townhouse community in SPA 8922.  It sends between 15+ kids per grade to WSHS.  Anderson wants to rezone SPA 8922 to WSHS claiming it will only be around 5 kids per grade because that is how many it sends to Lewis.  In my opinion, SPA 8922 will reflect a similar high number of high school students very quickly if it is rezoned to WSHS from Lewis.
[/quote]

Map 4 was never 'BRAC's map'.  They took the Thru map 4 and mage adjusting bases on the numbers and community feedback.  Moving kids from Rolling Valley was never recommended by BRAC.  I'm on the BRAC, but not for region 4.  The whole process was a complete mess.  [/quote]

That explains a lot.

FCPS really treated the BRAC members terribly

Every single meeting I attended, they threw them under the bus repeatedly, any time anyone expressed displeasure with the school board, Dr. Reid, Thru. FCPS or the process.

Our reps honestly tried to do the best job they could, follow the guidance, and rezone as few people as possible.  I spoke with several of the cpecial interest reps, and they tried to do a good job too.  FCPS treated the volunteers so poorly
[/quote]

Not to mention the Brac members who were literally threatened with legal action personally from disgruntled neighborhoods to leave them alone.  Which meant the loudest/most legally equipped neighborhoods went untouched even if was the most logical switch. And now they claim many of those BRAC members are interested in a full time position on the board going forward?  The few I have spoken too could not be done fast enough.  That was a lot of stress and additional work for being a volunteer. And on top of that having to be the scapegoat and take the blame on chin.
[/quote]

I’m sure they took a lot of undeserved grief.  I think they asked for more information from FCPS and Thru Consulting and typically were blown off.

I’ll also say that when I wrote to BRAC members, the BRAC members from our pyramid never acknowledged I’d written them and the BRAC member from FairFACTS Matters consistently did.  And we aren’t in the Langley pyramid, so that dispelled the notion that FairFACTS Matters was just a front for Great Falls.  [/quote]Name your pyramid.[/quote]

I don't respond well to commands on an anonymous forum. [/quote]How about I throw in a please to that command.

Just curious as to what your pyramid is and how FairFACTS got involved into BRAC.[/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