Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Congratulations to the Shouse Village and other Colvin Run areas for getting what they wanted. They persuaded the School Board to ignore the staff recommendation in 1984 and move them to McLean rather than Marshall. And now they've persuaded Elaine Tholen to ignore the staff recommendation in 2021 and move them back to Langley.

Well played, although I'm sure it didn't hurt your efforts that Tholen lives in the Langley district. Apartments are for other schools, not Langley.

You think the same people live there or even care? What are they passing down tips from new neighbor to new neighbor?

Same people, or more likely same strong-arm tactics.

I can't wait to see some of these recall petitions get additional steam now.

Anonymous wrote:Congratulations to the Shouse Village and other Colvin Run areas for getting what they wanted. They persuaded the School Board to ignore the staff recommendation in 1984 and move them to McLean rather than Marshall. And now they've persuaded Elaine Tholen to ignore the staff recommendation in 2021 and move them back to Langley.

Well played, although I'm sure it didn't hurt your efforts that Tholen lives in the Langley district. Apartments are for other schools, not Langley.

You think the same people live there or even care? What are they passing down tips from new neighbor to new neighbor?

You (clap) get (clap) the (clap) clown (clap) show (clap) you (clap) voted (clap) for.

Congratulations to the Shouse Village and other Colvin Run areas for getting what they wanted. They persuaded the School Board to ignore the staff recommendation in 1984 and move them to McLean rather than Marshall. And now they've persuaded Elaine Tholen to ignore the staff recommendation in 2021 and move them back to Langley.

Well played, although I'm sure it didn't hurt your efforts that Tholen lives in the Langley district. Apartments are for other schools, not Langley.

Anonymous wrote:I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I think the main advantage of modified C was that it provided greater "housing type diversity" at Langley, while on the downside created a small sliver of split feeder at Spring Hill ES (50/50-ish splits are better than small splits), and an attendance island for McLean students that was even further geographically separated from their peers than the status quo.

B avoids both of those two downsides _and_ eliminates an entire split feeder at Colvin Run, so makes a lot more social-relationship and geographical sense. The downside is yet more high-SES SFHs zoned to Langley.

Counterpoint to that downside is that the condos and townhomes that were under consideration via modified C were likewise still relatively high-SES housing, so not really worth bending over backwards for a logistically-worse option that wouldn't really move the needle on diversifying Langley anyway.

This is such bullshit. There is nothing about what they are now about to do that couldn't have been done years ago to coincide with the completion of Langley's renovation in 2018. They stalled because they said they needed to prioritize equity and act deliberately with an equity-based focus when it came to boundary adjustments.

The staff's recommendation reflected the staff's belief that the School Board meant what it said. It moved some apartments in Tysons that cost about 1/2 the price of a single-family house zoned to Colvin Run or Spring Hill to Langley. It also moved some rentals that people who can't afford a mortgage live in.

Apparently, the staff was stupid for taking the School Board at its word. Instead, they'll go with a proposal that makes for a cleaner map, but keeps Langley entirely free of condos and apartments and reassigns areas where some of the most actively engaged students at Longfellow and McLean live to Cooper and Langley.

We are looking to leave the county soon. We are fed up with FCPS and how it's overseen by people whose incompetence is only matched by their hypocrisy.

Wow. The areas that they are moving to Langley like Shouse Village, Wolf Trap Woods, etc. were full of kids who were among those most actively involved in all the activities at McLean. And their parents were among those most involved with the PTA, etc.

This will be a big blow to the school. I wonder if Tholen just wanted to do Langley a favor, it's her district.

Personally, they screw McLean over so often that I wish they'd just tear down the school and send everyone to Langley, Marshall, Falls Church, and Madison. It's like they are intentionally trying to drag it down every way they can.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New board docs are up

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BXWPMT64C6A7/$file/Presentation%20-%20McLean%20Langley%20High%20School%20Boundary%20Study%20Action_revised.pdf

I am confused. Those Docs make it seem like they will go with Option B. I thought they were leaning toward a modified option C?

People yelled at Elaine Tholen so she caved and now favors Option B. This eliminates the Colvin Run split feeder and also moves the single-family homes zoned for Spring Hill/Longfellow/McLean, but none of the Tysons apartments, to Cooper/Langley.

It is amazing how even after the School Board slowed down this boundary study for years because of how important it was to focus on "equity," they still cave when it comes to moving any multi-family housing to Langley.

Many of us will now be joining up with the #OpenFCPS group to support Tholen's recall.

Does the multi-family housing really add economic diversity anyway? Aren't those mostly luxury apartments?

Some are, some aren't.

There are condos in the area that the staff proposed to move that cost about $450K. The area that will end up getting moved is all single-family homes that start at about $875K.

They will claim tonight that they dug into additional data and discovered that there really isn't that much of a difference in the various areas. Of course, they never shared that data publicly, so that assertion may or may not be true. And it kind of begs the question as to why staff didn't already have that data when they started releasing all the options that prompted the feeding frenzy over who should get to bail on McLean.

This is capitulating to loud people who wanted the upgrade to the higher ranked school. It's what FCPS has done with every boundary change for over a decade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New board docs are up

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BXWPMT64C6A7/$file/Presentation%20-%20McLean%20Langley%20High%20School%20Boundary%20Study%20Action_revised.pdf

I am confused. Those Docs make it seem like they will go with Option B. I thought they were leaning toward a modified option C?

People yelled at Elaine Tholen so she caved and now favors Option B. This eliminates the Colvin Run split feeder and also moves the single-family homes zoned for Spring Hill/Longfellow/McLean, but none of the Tysons apartments, to Cooper/Langley.

It is amazing how even after the School Board slowed down this boundary study for years because of how important it was to focus on "equity," they still cave when it comes to moving any multi-family housing to Langley.

Many of us will now be joining up with the #OpenFCPS group to support Tholen's recall.

Does the multi-family housing really add economic diversity anyway? Aren't those mostly luxury apartments?

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I think the main advantage of modified C was that it provided greater "housing type diversity" at Langley, while on the downside created a small sliver of split feeder at Spring Hill ES (50/50-ish splits are better than small splits), and an attendance island for McLean students that was even further geographically separated from their peers than the status quo.

B avoids both of those two downsides _and_ eliminates an entire split feeder at Colvin Run, so makes a lot more social-relationship and geographical sense. The downside is yet more high-SES SFHs zoned to Langley.

Counterpoint to that downside is that the condos and townhomes that were under consideration via modified C were likewise still relatively high-SES housing, so not really worth bending over backwards for a logistically-worse option that wouldn't really move the needle on diversifying Langley anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New board docs are up

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BXWPMT64C6A7/$file/Presentation%20-%20McLean%20Langley%20High%20School%20Boundary%20Study%20Action_revised.pdf

I am confused. Those Docs make it seem like they will go with Option B. I thought they were leaning toward a modified option C?

People yelled at Elaine Tholen so she caved and now favors Option B. This eliminates the Colvin Run split feeder and also moves the single-family homes zoned for Spring Hill/Longfellow/McLean, but none of the Tysons apartments, to Cooper/Langley.

It is amazing how even after the School Board slowed down this boundary study for years because of how important it was to focus on "equity," they still cave when it comes to moving any multi-family housing to Langley.

Many of us will now be joining up with the #OpenFCPS group to support Tholen's recall.

Anonymous wrote:New board docs are up

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BXWPMT64C6A7/$file/Presentation%20-%20McLean%20Langley%20High%20School%20Boundary%20Study%20Action_revised.pdf

I am confused. Those Docs make it seem like they will go with Option B. I thought they were leaning toward a modified option C?

New board docs are up

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BXWPMT64C6A7/$file/Presentation%20-%20McLean%20Langley%20High%20School%20Boundary%20Study%20Action_revised.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What time is the meeting where they vote today?

Answering my own question. Open meetings starts at 7 or 7:30 but action items don't start until 8:30pm and this is one of several action items.

They rarely keep to the schedule on the agenda. The only question is how much later in the evening the boundary and CIP discussions will be.

Anonymous wrote:What time is the meeting where they vote today?

Answering my own question. Open meetings starts at 7 or 7:30 but action items don't start until 8:30pm and this is one of several action items.

What time is the meeting where they vote today?