Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:25
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else unable to make comments in the boundary explorer tool?
Did you try on a computer? Worked last night.
It’s not working on mobile or desktop. I’m wondering if they’ve reached their limit for entries.
I also just checked (laptop). It is indeed not working. Submit button will not submit
Scratch that...it just went through
I still can’t get it to work and I’ve tried multiple browsers and devices. Now no one will consider moving the piece of Cub Run that scenario 4 sends to Lees Corner to Brookfield instead. Lees Corner will needlessly be turned into a split feeder when Brooksfield was already one to begin with.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:17
Subject: Re:Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Question: does this meeting (Chantilly/Westfield) include the KAA adjustments?
I don’t think it does.
It’s pointless to discuss Scenario 4 for Chantilly and Westfield, as they will be severely impacted by KAA.
On the other hand, it would be unfair to discuss KAA with only Chantilly and Westfield parents.
IMHO, this is poor planning.
The whole thing is poor planning.
We have such an educated, accomplished, affluent community.
How on earth did we end up with such incompetent leadership?
Someone should introduce to the Critical Path Method in project planning.......it's been around for a very long time.
Just when you think they could not do anything dumber than already done, they find it.
Quite a few adjustments coming with KAA and they are continuing to have this meeting with Westfield/Chantilly.
All of these tweaks might need to be reconsidered with the opening of KAA.
This Chantilly/Westfield meeting should be rescheduled.
It'll be difficult to have this meeting without discussing many of the proposed KAA plans. Several changes appear in one document and not the other. I signed up just to hear the drama.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:12
Subject: Re:Boundary Review Meetings
Question: does this meeting (Chantilly/Westfield) include the KAA adjustments?
I don’t think it does.
It’s pointless to discuss Scenario 4 for Chantilly and Westfield, as they will be severely impacted by KAA.
On the other hand, it would be unfair to discuss KAA with only Chantilly and Westfield parents.
IMHO, this is poor planning.
The whole thing is poor planning.
We have such an educated, accomplished, affluent community.
How on earth did we end up with such incompetent leadership?
Someone should introduce to the Critical Path Method in project planning.......it's been around for a very long time.
Just when you think they could not do anything dumber than already done, they find it.
Quite a few adjustments coming with KAA and they are continuing to have this meeting with Westfield/Chantilly.
All of these tweaks might need to be reconsidered with the opening of KAA.
This Chantilly/Westfield meeting should be rescheduled.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:05
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else unable to make comments in the boundary explorer tool?
Did you try on a computer? Worked last night.
It’s not working on mobile or desktop. I’m wondering if they’ve reached their limit for entries.
I also just checked (laptop). It is indeed not working. Submit button will not submit
Scratch that...it just went through
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:05
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else unable to make comments in the boundary explorer tool?
Did you try on a computer? Worked last night.
It’s not working on mobile or desktop. I’m wondering if they’ve reached their limit for entries.
I also just checked (laptop). It is indeed not working. Submit button will not submit
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:03
Subject: Re:Boundary Review Meetings
It is the right thing to have grandfathering offered, but also, if they are redoing boundaries every 5 years like they say, the grandfathering can't last forever.
Beyond that, the reality is that people say they'll stay at their current school if grandfathered, but when they meet the reality of driving their kid to school every day, most will just rip the bandaid off and switch. Except for high school kids.
Beyond that, the reality is that people say they'll stay at their current school if grandfathered, but when they meet the reality of driving their kid to school every day, most will just rip the bandaid off and switch. Except for high school kids.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:03
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I feel sorry for any kids whose parents are giving the grandfathering argument of not wanting kids at two different schools. I'm sure those younger siblings would want to go to high school with all their friends who are rezoned, and not to the old one alone just because their sibling goes there.
The White Oaks families in question are LBSS either way.
Oops, maybe you meant the older kids, but didn't 2 older kids stand up and say they wanted the same school/choices as their siblings?
Yes because they already go to middle school with this Irving/wshs cohort and have older siblings at WSHS. These middle schoolers are being sent to LBSS after being at Irving for 2 years.
I think everyone supports grandfathering the Irving and other middle school kids through high school, especially since all the secondary 7th and 8th graders are grandfathered.
If the regular middle schoolers are not grandfathered through 12th grade, then none of the secondary 7th and 8th graders ahould be grandfathered.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:01
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I feel sorry for any kids whose parents are giving the grandfathering argument of not wanting kids at two different schools. I'm sure those younger siblings would want to go to high school with all their friends who are rezoned, and not to the old one alone just because their sibling goes there.
The White Oaks families in question are LBSS either way.
But the grandfathering should only last as long as the 6th grader is at the school... 1 school year.
It should not last indefinitely for elementary kids.
The younger siblings will still need to change schools.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 15:00
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I feel sorry for any kids whose parents are giving the grandfathering argument of not wanting kids at two different schools. I'm sure those younger siblings would want to go to high school with all their friends who are rezoned, and not to the old one alone just because their sibling goes there.
The White Oaks families in question are LBSS either way.
Oops, maybe you meant the older kids, but didn't 2 older kids stand up and say they wanted the same school/choices as their siblings?
Yes because they already go to middle school with this Irving/wshs cohort and have older siblings at WSHS. These middle schoolers are being sent to LBSS after being at Irving for 2 years.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 14:59
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:I feel sorry for any kids whose parents are giving the grandfathering argument of not wanting kids at two different schools. I'm sure those younger siblings would want to go to high school with all their friends who are rezoned, and not to the old one alone just because their sibling goes there.
I agree with that.
If it is only 6th graders grandfathered, it would just be 1 years before the older sibling moves off to middle school.
Then the younger sibling would need to do 1st-6th at a different school than their neighborhood.
Or would the grandfathering only be for 2026-27 until the grandfathered kid moves to middle school?
Anonymous
10/28/2025 14:58
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else unable to make comments in the boundary explorer tool?
Did you try on a computer? Worked last night.
It’s not working on mobile or desktop. I’m wondering if they’ve reached their limit for entries.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 14:56
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I feel sorry for any kids whose parents are giving the grandfathering argument of not wanting kids at two different schools. I'm sure those younger siblings would want to go to high school with all their friends who are rezoned, and not to the old one alone just because their sibling goes there.
The White Oaks families in question are LBSS either way.
Oops, maybe you meant the older kids, but didn't 2 older kids stand up and say they wanted the same school/choices as their siblings?
Anonymous
10/28/2025 14:55
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else unable to make comments in the boundary explorer tool?
Did you try on a computer? Worked last night.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 14:54
Subject: Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:I feel sorry for any kids whose parents are giving the grandfathering argument of not wanting kids at two different schools. I'm sure those younger siblings would want to go to high school with all their friends who are rezoned, and not to the old one alone just because their sibling goes there.
The White Oaks families in question are LBSS either way.
Anonymous
10/28/2025 14:53
Subject: Re:Boundary Review Meetings
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The chantilly/westfield meeting is on Thursday
Thanks.
There is also a short one tonight for Chantilly/Westfield.
Dear Families,
We understand that the community boundary review meeting scheduled for the Chantilly and Westfield pyramids on October 30 conflicts with an athletic event that is expected to affect families in both pyramids.
While the October 30 meeting will continue as scheduled, we have added an earlier hybrid meeting for families in the Chantilly and Westfield pyramids who are unable to attend on the 30th.
The additional meeting will be held in person at Fairfax High School and virtually via Zoom on Tuesday, October 28, from 6 to 6:30 p.m. Enter through Door 1. The consultant will present the latest draft map, Scenario 4, and changes specific to the Chantilly and Westfield pyramids. They will also take questions.
Please help us plan for this meeting by registering to attend. Click in person or virtual based on how you would like to participate. (A Woodson/Fairfax pyramid meeting will immediately follow at 6:30 p.m. in the same space.)
If you plan to participate in person, feel free to come to the event at 5:30 p.m. to explore Scenario 4 in the Boundary Explorer Tool. (Scenario 4 is the only option available at this time for community review and feedback. Scenario 3 is included in the Boundary Explorer Tool only as a point of reference and comparison.) A limited number of FCPS laptops will be available, and staff will be on site to support you in using the tool. If you plan to participate virtually, you may log on at 5:30 p.m., and a staff member can walk you through how to use the tool. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m.
Note: Each high school pyramid is represented on the Superintendent's Boundary Review Advisory Committee. In addition to leaving feedback on the Boundary Explorer Tool, you can find your pyramid representative’s email address to share feedback or ask questions. Please visit the FCPS website for more information. Thank you.
Fairfax County Public Schools
Question: does this meeting (Chantilly/Westfield) include the KAA adjustments?
I don’t think it does.
It’s pointless to discuss Scenario 4 for Chantilly and Westfield, as they will be severely impacted by KAA.
On the other hand, it would be unfair to discuss KAA with only Chantilly and Westfield parents.
IMHO, this is poor planning.
The whole thing is poor planning.
We have such an educated, accomplished, affluent community.
How on earth did we end up with such incompetent leadership?
Someone should introduce to the Critical Path Method in project planning.......it's been around for a very long time.