Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

Which three schools?

Tuckahoe, Nottingham, discovery (all at about 85-90% capacity).

Nottingham is using trailers.

They have trailers, they are still at 88% capacity. Some of the trailers are used for adult education. I take a daytime class there.

Students use them as well. What adult education class is sharing space with elementary students?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

Which three schools?

Tuckahoe, Nottingham, discovery (all at about 85-90% capacity).

Nottingham is using trailers.

They have trailers, they are still at 88% capacity. Some of the trailers are used for adult education. I take a daytime class there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

Which three schools?

Tuckahoe, Nottingham, discovery (all at about 85-90% capacity).

Nottingham is using trailers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

Which three schools?

Tuckahoe, Nottingham, discovery (all at about 85-90% capacity).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

Which three schools?

Anonymous wrote:FFS they are predicting and counting on a decline AGAIN. That's what got us into our current pickle.

"Not that long ago, Arlington school leaders were projecting an almost never-ending arc of student growth for the system. In 2017, the reported student body of just under 27,000 had surpassed the previous high, set at the apex of the Baby Boom in 1963.

Sponsored
But pre-pandemic prognostications that enrollment would surmount 32,000 by 2026 have now been scaled back, with the student population now expected to peak at just under 28,000 in 2025 and then begin to decline."

How are demographics changing to have less children in the system?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

The lunch at 10 issue is just life at some of these bigger schools regardless of whether they're under or over enrolled. If you've got cycle 650+kids through lunch, something has to give.

Also if I'm APS, what I see is that people fight tooth and nail to just stay in their school and don't really care how big or crowded it is. Those McKinley people fought like dogs to move to the next sardine can. Of course they want you to kick out OTHER people. But not you and yours.

No wonder APS punts the whole topic. It's not like anyone is rational

Honestly it shouldn't matter what the parents want. The county should set the boundaries based on attendance, capacity, projections, etc. Our parents in the 70s/80s didn't GAF about things like this.

Amen. These people are such losers. You’re running a public school district. Just do what’s best for the most people and get on with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

The lunch at 10 issue is just life at some of these bigger schools regardless of whether they're under or over enrolled. If you've got cycle 650+kids through lunch, something has to give.

Also if I'm APS, what I see is that people fight tooth and nail to just stay in their school and don't really care how big or crowded it is. Those McKinley people fought like dogs to move to the next sardine can. Of course they want you to kick out OTHER people. But not you and yours.

No wonder APS punts the whole topic. It's not like anyone is rational

Honestly it shouldn't matter what the parents want. The county should set the boundaries based on attendance, capacity, projections, etc. Our parents in the 70s/80s didn't GAF about things like this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

The lunch at 10 issue is just life at some of these bigger schools regardless of whether they're under or over enrolled. If you've got cycle 650+kids through lunch, something has to give.

Also if I'm APS, what I see is that people fight tooth and nail to just stay in their school and don't really care how big or crowded it is. Those McKinley people fought like dogs to move to the next sardine can. Of course they want you to kick out OTHER people. But not you and yours.

No wonder APS punts the whole topic. It's not like anyone is rational

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

It’s a problem when we have under capacity schools in areas where there is not a ton of planned growth, and keep putting the option schools in the areas where there is more planned growth and overcapacity schools. We live in walking distance to three under capacity schools. that shouldn’t be the case when other schools are losing green/recess space to trailers, having to eat lunch at 10 because of so many lunchtimes, etc. Time to make some tough decisions APS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People. They're just not doing the boundary adjustment next near They're not saying they'll never need to do it. They're making the decision based on the information they have right now. Which why disrupt kids and families when the schools aren't full????

Are you saying none of the schools are over capacity? That’s not true.