Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 14:34     Subject: Re:FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Curious. Why is this the only result we have heard from the BRAC meeting? Is this the only concern of FairFacts Matters?

We have heard nothing about the other Regions.


Well, FairFacts does have a lot of membership and people who are concerned about that area. But the fact that the region 5 folks said that one of their top priorities was moving an ES that’s not even in their region, and has not been the subject of any serious discussion or changes on any of the proposed maps so far does stand out … a lot. Maybe if region 2 said their top priority was Hunt Valley to Lewis, we would hear that too.


I hope it's not too late, and that Region 1 BRAC members can highlight at the next meeting that one of their top priorities in making sure Mantua is moved from Woodson to Falls Church.

Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 14:18     Subject: Re:FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
This is what transparency looks like. It comes out in dribs and drabs. It won’t be organized well and will have mistakes. We get to see each iteration and see how the sausage is made. Pretty soon people won’t want to look at each iteration and just want to wait for the final one to scream about.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 14:16     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Is the region 2 comments opening for anyone? I am getting an error message.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 14:08     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:They just updated the August 5 page with all the comments they received through the fcpsboundaryreview interactive map: https://www.fcps.edu/august-5-2025-superintendents-boundary-review-advisory-committee-meeting


So, do they ever share the priorities? Or is it a secret?

The priorities will likely be posted with the September BRAC notes.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 14:04     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It is a logical suggestion that will likely improve the evenness of region 5 schools, too. The regions are not geographically based so some region 5 schools are close to Herndon.


What does this mean? Please tell me which members are close to Herndon.

Anyone who has been reading these threads realizes how this happened. It happened when the committee was formed.

.


Region 5 includes a few schools close to Herndon but they are going to be affected far more by KAA than anything having to do with Forestville.

Odds are this “priority” recommendation was pushed through by one Woodson parent who is a notorious School Board shill. Whether SB members like Frisch and Lady put her up to it, or she did this on her own, the odds are high that this was her handiwork.

The BRAC process has been corrupt from the beginning, when they stacked the committee with some hand-picked members to supplement the pyramid representatives, and also gave Woodson three reps when every other pyramid besides Fairfax only had two.

Shame on Reid and shame on this School Board for orchestrating such a farce. The entire boundary study should be canceled.


Agree that BRAC makeup is skewed. There are multiple Great Falls members from Fairfacts Matters even though Great Falls is a tiny percentage of county population/


Right! I can’t believe great falls in region 1 made moving an entire school in region 5 a priority for region 1. That’s so gross of them to do that.

Oh wait, i might have it backwards.


Actually, someone on this thread did exactly that a few pages back.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:59     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:They just updated the August 5 page with all the comments they received through the fcpsboundaryreview interactive map: https://www.fcps.edu/august-5-2025-superintendents-boundary-review-advisory-committee-meeting


So, do they ever share the priorities? Or is it a secret?
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:58     Subject: Re:FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Curious. Why is this the only result we have heard from the BRAC meeting? Is this the only concern of FairFacts Matters?

We have heard nothing about the other Regions.


The fairfacts people have posted that each region needs to reach out to their own reps, so they get accurate info.

The person who posted was only sharing specifics for their region.

Each region developed 10 priorities, but only shared 3 with BRAC.

The 3 were shared verbally, not written down, so the guy who posted doesn't want yo go by memory and inaccurately repeat what he thinks he heard the other regions priorities, because he might be wrong.

You have to reach out to your representatives to get an accurate priority list for your region.


Transparency!
Did FCPS take notes or is this just a little workshop for fun?


FairFacts is doing their best to share information.

Direct your ire to FCPS not FairFacts.


That was not intended to ire FairFacts. However, it is interesting that is the only information that was shared. Why did the recorder not share his own region's priorities?

If they are going through this exercise, then FCPS should be posting the results. Did the regions turn in their work? or was it just verbal?

This whole process has smelled from the beginnign, but it just seems to be getting worse.


That poster has shared more information than anyone on the brac committee, anyone from Tru, and certainly anyone from FCPS.

We should all be grateful to him and Fairfacts.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:57     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It is a logical suggestion that will likely improve the evenness of region 5 schools, too. The regions are not geographically based so some region 5 schools are close to Herndon.


What does this mean? Please tell me which members are close to Herndon.

Anyone who has been reading these threads realizes how this happened. It happened when the committee was formed.

.


Region 5 includes a few schools close to Herndon but they are going to be affected far more by KAA than anything having to do with Forestville.

Odds are this “priority” recommendation was pushed through by one Woodson parent who is a notorious School Board shill. Whether SB members like Frisch and Lady put her up to it, or she did this on her own, the odds are high that this was her handiwork.

The BRAC process has been corrupt from the beginning, when they stacked the committee with some hand-picked members to supplement the pyramid representatives, and also gave Woodson three reps when every other pyramid besides Fairfax only had two.

Shame on Reid and shame on this School Board for orchestrating such a farce. The entire boundary study should be canceled.


Agree that BRAC makeup is skewed. There are multiple Great Falls members from Fairfacts Matters even though Great Falls is a tiny percentage of county population/


Right! I can’t believe great falls in region 1 made moving an entire school in region 5 a priority for region 1. That’s so gross of them to do that.

Oh wait, i might have it backwards.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:55     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
They just updated the August 5 page with all the comments they received through the fcpsboundaryreview interactive map: https://www.fcps.edu/august-5-2025-superintendents-boundary-review-advisory-committee-meeting
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:54     Subject: Re:FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Curious. Why is this the only result we have heard from the BRAC meeting? Is this the only concern of FairFacts Matters?

We have heard nothing about the other Regions.


The fairfacts people have posted that each region needs to reach out to their own reps, so they get accurate info.

The person who posted was only sharing specifics for their region.

Each region developed 10 priorities, but only shared 3 with BRAC.

The 3 were shared verbally, not written down, so the guy who posted doesn't want yo go by memory and inaccurately repeat what he thinks he heard the other regions priorities, because he might be wrong.

You have to reach out to your representatives to get an accurate priority list for your region.


Transparency!
Did FCPS take notes or is this just a little workshop for fun?


FairFacts is doing their best to share information.

Direct your ire to FCPS not FairFacts.


That was not intended to ire FairFacts. However, it is interesting that is the only information that was shared. Why did the recorder not share his own region's priorities?

If they are going through this exercise, then FCPS should be posting the results. Did the regions turn in their work? or was it just verbal?

This whole process has smelled from the beginnign, but it just seems to be getting worse.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:52     Subject: Re:FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Why would they take kids out of Herndon and send them to KAA?




They might take kids out of Herndon, and Centreville in the other direction, to backfill kids getting moved from Chantilly, Westfield and any other high school that is sending kids to the new high school.

There is always a multi school domino effect when a new high school opens that extends to many more high schools than the neighboring schools.


I think you are not fat all familiar with this area. Herndon in no way would "backfill" any of those schools.
Centreville kids who are adjacent to Westfield boundary certainly might do a "backfill." However, it should not require major changes there as there is lots of new construction i the Westfield area and Westfield is pretty full presently.
There are neighborhoods right by Centreville who are currently attending Fairfax. That might be a consideration but is likely not necessary.
Chantilly is considered to be very overcrowded. It is likely only one elementary school will be pulled out of Chantilly and, while there might be some adjustments, there should not be a need to backfill Chantilly.

Oakton may also need some adjustment. However, it appears that there is going to be major new construction in that area.

This has no impact on Herndon High.


Someone will backfill spots, and it will be a domino effe t 1 or 3 schools away.

Opening a new high school will affect far more schools than you think.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:50     Subject: Re:FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Curious. Why is this the only result we have heard from the BRAC meeting? Is this the only concern of FairFacts Matters?

We have heard nothing about the other Regions.


The fairfacts people have posted that each region needs to reach out to their own reps, so they get accurate info.

The person who posted was only sharing specifics for their region.

Each region developed 10 priorities, but only shared 3 with BRAC.

The 3 were shared verbally, not written down, so the guy who posted doesn't want yo go by memory and inaccurately repeat what he thinks he heard the other regions priorities, because he might be wrong.

You have to reach out to your representatives to get an accurate priority list for your region.


Transparency!
Did FCPS take notes or is this just a little workshop for fun?


FairFacts is doing their best to share information.

Direct your ire to FCPS not FairFacts.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:49     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The slide that says 47% of preschool students are transfers is sort of misleading because there are not preschool programs in every school…so of course there are going to be big numbers of them going outside their base school.


Waaaait

Why on earth would FCPS even include preschool students in any rezoning decisions?

Their data was presdnted specifically to bury the issue that everyone is in arms about, rezoning high schools.

The preschool data needs to be dropped entirely.

The high school data )AP/IB and language transfers) needs to be isolated and analyzed separately from the rest of the data.


I agree that most of us are not concerned about that, but it does affect space. And, elementary schools are included in this study.



Right.

But all of the programs that effect elementary school enrollment and cspacity have zero connection to high school.

FCPS lumped high school with elementary, which completely masked the problem areas of high school.

Almost all high school transfers are due to kids leaving IB schools for AP schools, or kids using language classes to transfer to high performing schools. Neither of those transfer reasons were recognized in Tru's last batch of information.

All the things that were recognized: AAP, elementary school language inmersion programs and preschool programs do not have anything to do with high school.

If you have been attending meetings and following this issue, it is crystal clear that the one thing people county wide are upset with and angry about is the potential rezoning of their high schools.

Hardly anyone is mentioning being upset about elementary schools getting rezoned, except for how the rezoning of the elementary school will affect their high school rezoning.

Yet FCPS is completely ignoring and hiding the high school issues. Fcps is lumping the high schools with elementary schools, so the high school cspacity problems and needs can be hidden and ignored.

People are unhappy about potential elementary rezoning. They are furious about potential high school rezoning.

The high school data needs to be isolated.

The preschool data needs to be entirely removed from the discussion.
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:43     Subject: Re:FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Curious. Why is this the only result we have heard from the BRAC meeting? Is this the only concern of FairFacts Matters?

We have heard nothing about the other Regions.


The fairfacts people have posted that each region needs to reach out to their own reps, so they get accurate info.

The person who posted was only sharing specifics for their region.

Each region developed 10 priorities, but only shared 3 with BRAC.

The 3 were shared verbally, not written down, so the guy who posted doesn't want yo go by memory and inaccurately repeat what he thinks he heard the other regions priorities, because he might be wrong.

You have to reach out to your representatives to get an accurate priority list for your region.


Transparency!
Did FCPS take notes or is this just a little workshop for fun?
Anonymous
Post 08/09/2025 13:42     Subject: FCPS Boundary Review - New Maps
Anonymous wrote:I would have thought Mantua people in region five would not want any of Langley moved out, since that would open up more space for Marshall and McLean to move to Langley and not Falls Church. And if Falls Church has more room, then they have more space for Mantua.

Oh, please.

Everyone knows FCPS won’t move any neighborhoods with wealthy residents from a “higher-prestige” pyramid to Falls Church HS. Sure they’ll float a few adjustments, like with the Timber Lane area, but in the end, the School Board will bow to pressure from the well-resourced, just like it always does. They’ll find a solidly low-income area to move and make up for new capacity at FCHS. Or they’ll shuffle the boundaries with Annandale or Justice. If there are changes, the high-SES pyramids will just get wealthier and the lower-SES pyramids will get poorer, per usual.