Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our School Board--and especially the new School Board--is not focused on all FCPS students. Some--particularly Omesh-has expressed intentions openly.

Who is she focused on?

I know she is an advocate of One Fairfax.

Are you saying she doesn’t care about the happiness of McLean parents because they are not low income?

I’m betting PP is the same poster who repeatedly goes after Omeish because she didn’t call out some old guy from Reston who used the phrase “lily white” to describe Langley when interviewing her before the election. Be that as it may, the election is over.

From what I can tell, Omeish cares about student perspectives, so in McLean’s case that would suggest a sensitivity to overcrowding, but also to the desire of most students to remain with the same cohort of kids through graduation. She went to Robinson and Yale, so it’s not like she hasn’t been around higher-income families and students.

Anonymous wrote:Our School Board--and especially the new School Board--is not focused on all FCPS students. Some--particularly Omesh-has expressed intentions openly.

Here we go again...

Anonymous wrote:Our School Board--and especially the new School Board--is not focused on all FCPS students. Some--particularly Omesh-has expressed intentions openly.

Who is she focused on?

I know she is an advocate of One Fairfax.

Are you saying she doesn’t care about the happiness of McLean parents because they are not low income?

Our School Board--and especially the new School Board--is not focused on all FCPS students. Some--particularly Omesh-has expressed intentions openly.

Anonymous wrote:Kids are going to be moved from McLean to Langley. It will be nice of they can also align the middle schoolers but it is not a deal breaker. What people who are opposed to the redistricting don't seem to get is that is will happen whether their "demands" are met or not

Also the idea of keeping Langley under enrolled because the population may grow someday is just laughable

Perhaps it is not a deal breaker to you, or to FCPS staff or some School Board members. However, if they go down the path of making Colvin Run and Spring Hill students among the 25-30% of students who go to Longfellow rather than Cooper, and then make them among the 5-10% of Longfellow students who go to Langley rather than McLean, there will be a lot of unhappy parents. It will also expose just how bad FCPS planning has been in recent years, and lead to severe criticisms of FCPS by certain members of the Board of Supervisors.

FWIW, the Great Falls Citizens Association has urged FCPS to look at its projections for Langley more carefully before moving any McLean students there - although it hasn’t come out and said no kids should be redistricted.

Anonymous wrote:Kids are going to be moved from McLean to Langley. It will be nice of they can also align the middle schoolers but it is not a deal breaker. What people who are opposed to the redistricting don't seem to get is that is will happen whether their "demands" are met or not

Also the idea of keeping Langley under enrolled because the population may grow someday is just laughable

Who is floating that idea? No one.

Kids are going to be moved from McLean to Langley. It will be nice of they can also align the middle schoolers but it is not a deal breaker. What people who are opposed to the redistricting don't seem to get is that is will happen whether their "demands" are met or not

Also the idea of keeping Langley under enrolled because the population may grow someday is just laughable

Anonymous wrote:So no kids will be moved from McLean to Langley?

My oldest will start cooper next year. Construction doesn’t look like it started yet. I wonder if there is a delay because now they need to add seats to line up extra seats with Langley.

Who knows? Could just be a lot of trailers at Cooper for a few years, like there were at Longfellow during its renovation (Longfellow still had AAP kids from the Langley pyramid at the time).

So no kids will be moved from McLean to Langley?

My oldest will start cooper next year. Construction doesn’t look like it started yet. I wonder if there is a delay because now they need to add seats to line up extra seats with Langley.

It's okay to keep kids overcrowded even if there is space nearby, as long as it's because you are holding them for later distribution elsewhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McSpaces has over 700 people on its mailing list now. Hundreds of people showed up at the community meetings in December and left underwhelmed by the lack of data and clear plans. Over a dozen community members and students from McLean testified at the CIP hearing in January.

The themes have been clear; if FCPS wants community support:

* All current students must be grandfathered
* The middle school boundaries must also be adjusted
* There must be plans for a permanent addition at MHS

Sounds reasonable.

I don't know about the permanent addition, because I don't live in that area and know the details. But, the other two I understand. That should apply to anytime kids are redistricted.
It boggles my mind that this was not already done. I live in a boundary where the high school has been bursting at the seams for years. However, there is no neighboring school that has room, either. To have a high school right next door that has room and to have this situation just screams a lack of common sense.

It's not lack of common sense. They specifically said (last year) that they would not adjust the boundaries until the new policy was done.

The new policy was being written to prioritize race and socioeconomics. The board discussed bussing and a complete redraw countywide. McLean and Langley are too demographically similar, and adjusting between those two doesn't distribute children properly.

This is why they rushed to amend the CIP when too many parents started paying attention too close to an election, and why not thing was done for a few months. Now they wait for the consultant.

Gosh, I can’t imagine why parents were furious with these proposals and mobilized to fight them. /s

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no reason to amend the CIP in September, shortly before work was to start on the next one; and pretend that they were going to give relief to McLean by Fall 2020.

Except, of course, fear of losing seats in the November election.

The people who voted no or abstained from voting were voted out. So it looks like they made the right choice.

Exactly. Well-played. (The game, and probably the parents too)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There was no reason to amend the CIP in September, shortly before work was to start on the next one; and pretend that they were going to give relief to McLean by Fall 2020.

Except, of course, fear of losing seats in the November election.

The people who voted no or abstained from voting were voted out. So it looks like they made the right choice.

DP. I am hoping the new School Board will do better. If they don’t, we really ought to go back to a system of appointed rather than elected School Board members.

Anonymous wrote:There was no reason to amend the CIP in September, shortly before work was to start on the next one; and pretend that they were going to give relief to McLean by Fall 2020.

Except, of course, fear of losing seats in the November election.

The people who voted no or abstained from voting were voted out. So it looks like they made the right choice.

There was no reason to amend the CIP in September, shortly before work was to start on the next one; and pretend that they were going to give relief to McLean by Fall 2020.

Except, of course, fear of losing seats in the November election.