Anonymous wrote:Ok. I need to some clarification.
Someone posted that FARM's rates are RISING?!?! in the southern part of the county. Is that really true?
Please explain how that is possible. I just read article whining about how affordable housing in Arlington has dramatically decreased.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:These maps with the #s are so much more helpful. I'm in South Arl, zoned for Gunston under almost any scenario. Based on these maps/numbers, H is my preference. Honestly, I don't care about Williamsburg and its numbers. They have their own issues. Let's just do the best with the situation we have in the south, which appears to me to be H.
A PP who pointed out that the Alignment map would crush Jefferson was right on - not only would it be over 50% FARMS, it would be the second most over-capacity in just a few more years. Not a good solution. Plus that Arl Heights area is already getting hosed in the HS debate.
Wow, a bit heavy, don't you think? I thought only parents in N. Arl. were seemingly this selfish? You mean to say that even parents in the Southern part only care about their own backyard? So you say the stated need for diversity is all a ruse???
Dp- is reading hard for you? I don't want to insult you if you have some sort of developmental delay...
The above post is obviously saying that we should do the best we can within reason. If that means that Williamsburg becomes under capacity, all white, and rich- so be it. The county has created some borderline insurmountable problems. We can only do so much. If there is a solution that solves most of our issues, but Williamsburg ends up not shouldering their fair share- so be it.
I'm not looking for a pound of flesh as a south Arlington parent. Just a reasonable plan.

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:These maps with the #s are so much more helpful. I'm in South Arl, zoned for Gunston under almost any scenario. Based on these maps/numbers, H is my preference. Honestly, I don't care about Williamsburg and its numbers. They have their own issues. Let's just do the best with the situation we have in the south, which appears to me to be H.
A PP who pointed out that the Alignment map would crush Jefferson was right on - not only would it be over 50% FARMS, it would be the second most over-capacity in just a few more years. Not a good solution. Plus that Arl Heights area is already getting hosed in the HS debate.
Wow, a bit heavy, don't you think? I thought only parents in N. Arl. were seemingly this selfish? You mean to say that even parents in the Southern part only care about their own backyard? So you say the stated need for diversity is all a ruse???
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:These maps with the #s are so much more helpful. I'm in South Arl, zoned for Gunston under almost any scenario. Based on these maps/numbers, H is my preference. Honestly, I don't care about Williamsburg and its numbers. They have their own issues. Let's just do the best with the situation we have in the south, which appears to me to be H.
A PP who pointed out that the Alignment map would crush Jefferson was right on - not only would it be over 50% FARMS, it would be the second most over-capacity in just a few more years. Not a good solution. Plus that Arl Heights area is already getting hosed in the HS debate.
Wow, a bit heavy, don't you think? I thought only parents in N. Arl. were seemingly this selfish? You mean to say that even parents in the Southern part only care about their own backyard? So you say the stated need for diversity is all a ruse???
Anonymous wrote:Ok. I need to some clarification.
Someone posted that FARM's rates are RISING?!?! in the southern part of the county. Is that really true?
Please explain how that is possible. I just read article whining about how affordable housing in Arlington has dramatically decreased.
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
These maps with the #s are so much more helpful. I'm in South Arl, zoned for Gunston under almost any scenario. Based on these maps/numbers, H is my preference. Honestly, I don't care about Williamsburg and its numbers. They have their own issues. Let's just do the best with the situation we have in the south, which appears to me to be H.
A PP who pointed out that the Alignment map would crush Jefferson was right on - not only would it be over 50% FARMS, it would be the second most over-capacity in just a few more years. Not a good solution. Plus that Arl Heights area is already getting hosed in the HS debate.
I disagree. Scenarios that leave one school both with low farms levels and highly under-enrolled seem ridiculous, when we're given the chance to fix these issues.
PP here. I appreciate your point, and I'm pro-diversity and pro-doing something about the demographics. However, there are legitimate countervailing factors, not least of which is that many families, including in both the north and south, don't want to take a long bus ride to a school very far away (understanding that "very far" is a relative term in Arlington). I don't think all of that is racist subterfuge. People are allowed to make choices about where they live and are allowed to prefer neighborhood schools. People are allowed to not prioritize diversity, whatever that means, when it comes to their own families. I personally don't live in the Williamsburg zone on purpose and I'm not going to force my penchant for diversity down everyone's throats when there are legitimately held preferences on the other side. If there are reasonable ways to achieve some fairness, taking the county's housing/AH history as an unfortunate given, then that's what I personally am in favor of.
So how can we reasonably do this? Do any of the scenarios come close?
Like I said, I support H. It evens out Kenmore without overburdening either TJ or Gunston. My conclusion from comparing all the maps is that fr/l rates are projected to rise in the south overall. That is a function of geography and of non-school policy choices made years before. This looks to me like the best we can do without some artificial island. It is certainly the best we can do of the proposals on the table. Whether the SB will swoop in with some made-up hybrid option at the last minute is a different story, of course.
H isn't without real costs - see the Swanson parent poster, who I genuinely feel for. I don't have a middle schooler so I can't say that this is a small thing to that small group of families. We aren't in the walk zone for any school, in fact. On balance, I'd vote to sacrifice the interests of that small group in walking in favor of what I believe to be best for about half the county's students. Not to say it's a free choice though.
What school are you zoned for?
Anonymous wrote:
Like I said, I support H. It evens out Kenmore without overburdening either TJ or Gunston. My conclusion from comparing all the maps is that fr/l rates are projected to rise in the south overall. That is a function of geography and of non-school policy choices made years before. This looks to me like the best we can do without some artificial island. It is certainly the best we can do of the proposals on the table. Whether the SB will swoop in with some made-up hybrid option at the last minute is a different story, of course.
H isn't without real costs - see the Swanson parent poster, who I genuinely feel for. I don't have a middle schooler so I can't say that this is a small thing to that small group of families. We aren't in the walk zone for any school, in fact. On balance, I'd vote to sacrifice the interests of that small group in walking in favor of what I believe to be best for about half the county's students. Not to say it's a free choice though.
Anonymous wrote:These maps with the #s are so much more helpful. I'm in South Arl, zoned for Gunston under almost any scenario. Based on these maps/numbers, H is my preference. Honestly, I don't care about Williamsburg and its numbers. They have their own issues. Let's just do the best with the situation we have in the south, which appears to me to be H.
A PP who pointed out that the Alignment map would crush Jefferson was right on - not only would it be over 50% FARMS, it would be the second most over-capacity in just a few more years. Not a good solution. Plus that Arl Heights area is already getting hosed in the HS debate.
Anonymous wrote:
Like I said, I support H. It evens out Kenmore without overburdening either TJ or Gunston. My conclusion from comparing all the maps is that fr/l rates are projected to rise in the south overall. That is a function of geography and of non-school policy choices made years before. This looks to me like the best we can do without some artificial island. It is certainly the best we can do of the proposals on the table. Whether the SB will swoop in with some made-up hybrid option at the last minute is a different story, of course.
H isn't without real costs - see the Swanson parent poster, who I genuinely feel for. I don't have a middle schooler so I can't say that this is a small thing to that small group of families. We aren't in the walk zone for any school, in fact. On balance, I'd vote to sacrifice the interests of that small group in walking in favor of what I believe to be best for about half the county's students. Not to say it's a free choice though.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does it do any good to send an email or express viewpoints, or is there realistically already a plan in place? Right now I'm 3/4 mile away from Swanson, yet my kids will need to be bussed all the way to Kenmore under many of these proposed plans. I understand bussing kids around if they're relatively equal distances away from two schools, but this makes no sense. Doesn't it seem weird to anyone else? When I grew up, you went to the schools that were closest to where you actually lived; this is crazy.
If you are 3/4 of a mile from Swanson- I suggest that before you complain about being 'bussed all the way to Kenmore" you put your address and Kenmore's address into Google maps. The school's are less than 2 miles apart.
I did...
which planning unit is less than 3/4 of a mile to Swanson, and is proposed to be moved to Kenmore where it would be eligible for bus service (e.g. more than 1.5 miles). The way I read the map- all of the Swanson units moving to Kenmore are less than 1.5 miles from Kenmore and thus walkers to Kenmore as well.
Well then you read it wrong. Because my home is proposed to move to Kenmore in some of the scenarios, and it is 2 miles to Kenmore, less than a mile to Swanson. And yes, I know how to use Google maps. No, I won't give you my address.
We are in the same situation. And will fight to stay at Swanson because we are only a few blocks from it, not for any racial or income-based criterion that couldn't be furthest from my mind. But of course, that pretext is oh-so easy to use against us! And yes, if our house were the same distance to Kenmore, I couldn't care less which school my kids went to, and would send them there without a second thought. Again, I'm concerned about distance for children whose days already start earlier than mine. I do know that my kids would get a good education in any of Arlington's MS, I'm already aware of that, thank you very much. The issue is what's the closest to our address and how would the kids be able to get there, e.g. a reasonable walking option.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does it do any good to send an email or express viewpoints, or is there realistically already a plan in place? Right now I'm 3/4 mile away from Swanson, yet my kids will need to be bussed all the way to Kenmore under many of these proposed plans. I understand bussing kids around if they're relatively equal distances away from two schools, but this makes no sense. Doesn't it seem weird to anyone else? When I grew up, you went to the schools that were closest to where you actually lived; this is crazy.
If you are 3/4 of a mile from Swanson- I suggest that before you complain about being 'bussed all the way to Kenmore" you put your address and Kenmore's address into Google maps. The school's are less than 2 miles apart.
I did...
which planning unit is less than 3/4 of a mile to Swanson, and is proposed to be moved to Kenmore where it would be eligible for bus service (e.g. more than 1.5 miles). The way I read the map- all of the Swanson units moving to Kenmore are less than 1.5 miles from Kenmore and thus walkers to Kenmore as well.
Well then you read it wrong. Because my home is proposed to move to Kenmore in some of the scenarios, and it is 2 miles to Kenmore, less than a mile to Swanson. And yes, I know how to use Google maps. No, I won't give you my address.
They are either zoned for Kenmore or Williamsburg.Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
These maps with the #s are so much more helpful. I'm in South Arl, zoned for Gunston under almost any scenario. Based on these maps/numbers, H is my preference. Honestly, I don't care about Williamsburg and its numbers. They have their own issues. Let's just do the best with the situation we have in the south, which appears to me to be H.
A PP who pointed out that the Alignment map would crush Jefferson was right on - not only would it be over 50% FARMS, it would be the second most over-capacity in just a few more years. Not a good solution. Plus that Arl Heights area is already getting hosed in the HS debate.
I disagree. Scenarios that leave one school both with low farms levels and highly under-enrolled seem ridiculous, when we're given the chance to fix these issues.
PP here. I appreciate your point, and I'm pro-diversity and pro-doing something about the demographics. However, there are legitimate countervailing factors, not least of which is that many families, including in both the north and south, don't want to take a long bus ride to a school very far away (understanding that "very far" is a relative term in Arlington). I don't think all of that is racist subterfuge. People are allowed to make choices about where they live and are allowed to prefer neighborhood schools. People are allowed to not prioritize diversity, whatever that means, when it comes to their own families. I personally don't live in the Williamsburg zone on purpose and I'm not going to force my penchant for diversity down everyone's throats when there are legitimately held preferences on the other side. If there are reasonable ways to achieve some fairness, taking the county's housing/AH history as an unfortunate given, then that's what I personally am in favor of.
So how can we reasonably do this? Do any of the scenarios come close?
Like I said, I support H. It evens out Kenmore without overburdening either TJ or Gunston. My conclusion from comparing all the maps is that fr/l rates are projected to rise in the south overall. That is a function of geography and of non-school policy choices made years before. This looks to me like the best we can do without some artificial island. It is certainly the best we can do of the proposals on the table. Whether the SB will swoop in with some made-up hybrid option at the last minute is a different story, of course.
H isn't without real costs - see the Swanson parent poster, who I genuinely feel for. I don't have a middle schooler so I can't say that this is a small thing to that small group of families. We aren't in the walk zone for any school, in fact. On balance, I'd vote to sacrifice the interests of that small group in walking in favor of what I believe to be best for about half the county's students. Not to say it's a free choice though.
What school are you zoned for?