Anonymous wrote:Happy to better understand the issue and work towards a solution. What solution are you proposing? Are you requesting that the community ask the school board not to dissolve the committee? If so, let us know why having that committee is better than having three community members sit on the school board's committee.

The current FPAC has representatives from each magisterial district. The proposal to add hand-picked community members to the CPDC ensures most magisterial districts will not be represented. That seems like a bad idea, since magisterial districts tend to have different needs and priorities when it comes to facilities.

I think FPAC would function better if it received clear advice on the areas where the School Board is seeking its input, with a clear commitment that Facilities staff will respond on a timely basis to each FPAC recommendation and the entire package will receive consideration by the full board at a designated work session.

It's absurd how little time the School Board spends on facilities and capital planning. There's typically a work session that lasts about 1/2 a day before the CIP is voted on, and that work session occurs so soon before the vote on the CIP that there's no time to make any meaningful adjustments to the CIP. They jumped to buy KAA, but most School Board members had never set foot in the building before they approved a $150-200 million purchase. Putting three community members on a committee that only consists of a subset of board members likely will lead to some board members paying even less attention to facilities and capital planning.

Happy to better understand the issue and work towards a solution. What solution are you proposing? Are you requesting that the community ask the school board not to dissolve the committee? If so, let us know why having that committee is better than having three community members sit on the school board's committee.

It’s weird that people care enough about this stuff to take to an anonymous message board to complain.

This isn’t new. The Board has historically ignored parent committees. It is a way to get the activist parents off their back and so that the parents feel like they are making headway, until they figure it out and fade away because their kids are now in high school and “why bother” .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. You said BRAC at the end when you meant to say FPAC

2. You can't just post this stuff without links. Where are you finding this information?

Yes, I meant FPAC at the end, and clearly I can post this information without a link. I just did.

Would you like a link? Here it is: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DMXKP752C8E0/$file/CPDC-FPAC%20Kyle.pdf

This looks commonsense. What’s the problem?

The School Board created an advisory committee, they largely ignore the input they get from the committee because they are lazy and pay scant attention to facilities, and then they blame the committee for not providing good advice.

It's a slap in the face of those who've served on the committee over the years.

Are you a member of the committee?

No, but I’ve known people who served on it. They spent a lot of time trying to come up with sensible recommendations and got ignored because the School Board members have the attention span of gnats and pay no attention to facilities, except when they can do something big and splashy like buying KAA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. You said BRAC at the end when you meant to say FPAC

2. You can't just post this stuff without links. Where are you finding this information?

Yes, I meant FPAC at the end, and clearly I can post this information without a link. I just did.

Would you like a link? Here it is: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DMXKP752C8E0/$file/CPDC-FPAC%20Kyle.pdf

This looks commonsense. What’s the problem?

The School Board created an advisory committee, they largely ignore the input they get from the committee because they are lazy and pay scant attention to facilities, and then they blame the committee for not providing good advice.

It's a slap in the face of those who've served on the committee over the years.

Are you a member of the committee?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. You said BRAC at the end when you meant to say FPAC

2. You can't just post this stuff without links. Where are you finding this information?

Yes, I meant FPAC at the end, and clearly I can post this information without a link. I just did.

Would you like a link? Here it is: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DMXKP752C8E0/$file/CPDC-FPAC%20Kyle.pdf

This looks commonsense. What’s the problem?

The School Board created an advisory committee, they largely ignore the input they get from the committee because they are lazy and pay scant attention to facilities, and then they blame the committee for not providing good advice.

It's a slap in the face of those who've served on the committee over the years.

Well, the one on the committee when the Hutchison site was picked for the new Western school was not a quality appointee. Lived in my neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. You said BRAC at the end when you meant to say FPAC

2. You can't just post this stuff without links. Where are you finding this information?

Yes, I meant FPAC at the end, and clearly I can post this information without a link. I just did.

Would you like a link? Here it is: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DMXKP752C8E0/$file/CPDC-FPAC%20Kyle.pdf

This looks commonsense. What’s the problem?

The School Board created an advisory committee, they largely ignore the input they get from the committee because they are lazy and pay scant attention to facilities, and then they blame the committee for not providing good advice.

It's a slap in the face of those who've served on the committee over the years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. You said BRAC at the end when you meant to say FPAC

2. You can't just post this stuff without links. Where are you finding this information?

Yes, I meant FPAC at the end, and clearly I can post this information without a link. I just did.

Would you like a link? Here it is: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DMXKP752C8E0/$file/CPDC-FPAC%20Kyle.pdf

This looks commonsense. What’s the problem?

Anonymous wrote:1. You said BRAC at the end when you meant to say FPAC

2. You can't just post this stuff without links. Where are you finding this information?

Yes, I meant FPAC at the end, and clearly I can post this information without a link. I just did.

Would you like a link? Here it is: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/DMXKP752C8E0/$file/CPDC-FPAC%20Kyle.pdf

Good to know. I’m going to do early voting tomorrow and I’m going to vote no on that bond issue. They keep showing how much they despise the community. I don’t trust them with more money.

Anonymous wrote:There's an effort underway to dissolve the Facilities Planning Advisory Council, which is composed of community members, and instead appoint three community members to the School Board's Comprehensive Planning and Development Committee, which is currently composed entirely of School Board members.

FPAC recommendations have been ignored by the School Board for years, so perhaps it's no big deal to dissolve the committee, but this means they'll likely have less community input on facilities issues in the future.

Some of the language in the materials to dissolve FPAC is fairly insulting. Historically, the issue hasn't been the lack of expertise on the part of the community members on the FPAC, but the lack of competence and depth in FCPS's Office of Facilities Services and Capital Planning and the lack of attention paid to FCPS facilities by School Board members. Rather than acknowledge that, they complain that BRAC members don't provide useful advice.

I think this is the group who recommended the Hutchison site for the new Western High School. This was after FCPS or the BOS gave away the KAA site to the Saudis.
The site was unsuitable for many, many reasons--but mainly, it was not even in the area that needed it. The traffic would have been impossible, and, the site was unsuitable for other reasons.

So if this is the kind of work they do, I support dissolving it.

1. You said BRAC at the end when you meant to say FPAC

2. You can't just post this stuff without links. Where are you finding this information?

Who wants to dissolve tge committe?

Reid?

The school board?

A citizen group?

There's an effort underway to dissolve the Facilities Planning Advisory Council, which is composed of community members, and instead appoint three community members to the School Board's Comprehensive Planning and Development Committee, which is currently composed entirely of School Board members.

FPAC recommendations have been ignored by the School Board for years, so perhaps it's no big deal to dissolve the committee, but this means they'll likely have less community input on facilities issues in the future.

Some of the language in the materials to dissolve FPAC is fairly insulting. Historically, the issue hasn't been the lack of expertise on the part of the community members on the FPAC, but the lack of competence and depth in FCPS's Office of Facilities Services and Capital Planning and the lack of attention paid to FCPS facilities by School Board members. Rather than acknowledge that, they complain that BRAC members don't provide useful advice.