McLean high school parents have been pushing, I think that they arranged meetings with Brabrand and Strauss.

It made local news.

I am sure that the video Voices of Fairfax made on the boundary policy and One Fairfax also made a difference.

It's got 5,000 or so views.

https://mailchi.mp/257c588cc43b/tell-the-fairfax-supervisors-to-end-the-countys-voluntary-collaboration-with-ice-today-311205

Tholen supports getting ICE out of Fairfax.

If they do something, it will be in response to the efforts of everyone involved but the One Great Falls people. The majority of the SB knows it’s primarily a front for the local Republicans that will not give them any credit for anything they do before their current terms expire.

So, only Great Falls Republicans care that McLean is overcrowded?
Only Great Falls Republicans care to keep their kids at Langley?

Sure.

Anonymous wrote:

As for the prior SB discussions, it was not clear whether they wanted to put a McLean boundary study on hold until they’d done a county-wide boundary study or instead simply updated the boundary policy. I don’t think they really knew themselves, which is why some of the discussions earlier this year accomplished little. If the majority of the Board has now realized the downsides (both to students and to their political careers) of protracted delay, and are now ready to start doing something to address the overcrowding, that is a positive development. And it needn’t stop Buford, Karloutsos, or any other candidate from arguing that, had only they served on the School Board at the time, there would have been greater attention to the overcrowding situations and the delays would not have occurred.

This is pure BS. If Great Falls had not spoken up this would not have happened. McLean parents added on. They had been complaining for some time.

But, the driving force on the change on the SB is the election. Janie did nothing until it was clear Dems would be in trouble.

If they do something, it will be in response to the efforts of everyone involved but the One Great Falls people. The majority of the SB knows it’s primarily a front for the local Republicans that will not give them any credit for anything they do before their current terms expire.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Tholen's website. Her background and issues show that the environment is her big thing. Will be interesting to see how she answers the questionnaire.

I got the impression that part of the reason she spoke at last night’s SB meeting was that she preferred to communicate her positions directly, rather than have a group like “Voices of Fairfax” purport to collect and/or present her views.

She has a website like everyone else.

The voices people drew attention to her relationship with current board members, but anyone can go to her website and see what her positions are.

She was smart to attend the board meeting and reinforce her support for Langley and McLean.

I suppose we'll see more candidates coming before the election to do the same, and to present on issues in other districts.

Yes. And, she changed it after the Langley issue hit the public eye. Before that, she was going with OneFairfax. Now, there is nothing about OneFairfax on her site.

As for the prior SB discussions, it was not clear whether they wanted to put a McLean boundary study on hold until they’d done a county-wide boundary study or instead simply updated the boundary policy. I don’t think they really knew themselves, which is why some of the discussions earlier this year accomplished little. If the majority of the Board has now realized the downsides (both to students and to their political careers) of protracted delay, and are now ready to start doing something to address the overcrowding, that is a positive development. And it needn’t stop Buford, Karloutsos, or any other candidate from arguing that, had only they served on the School Board at the time, there would have been greater attention to the overcrowding situations and the delays would not have occurred.

This is pure BS. If Great Falls had not spoken up this would not have happened. McLean parents added on. They had been complaining for some time.

But, the driving force on the change on the SB is the election. Janie did nothing until it was clear Dems would be in trouble.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Tholen's website. Her background and issues show that the environment is her big thing. Will be interesting to see how she answers the questionnaire.

I got the impression that part of the reason she spoke at last night’s SB meeting was that she preferred to communicate her positions directly, rather than have a group like “Voices of Fairfax” purport to collect and/or present her views.

She has a website like everyone else.

The voices people drew attention to her relationship with current board members, but anyone can go to her website and see what her positions are.

She was smart to attend the board meeting and reinforce her support for Langley and McLean.

I suppose we'll see more candidates coming before the election to do the same, and to present on issues in other districts.

I think the Langley pyramid who watched her speak or who will catch it on video later are perfectly happy with her advocacy to keep all current neighborhoods in the pyramid.

Anonymous wrote:Just looked at Tholen's website. Her background and issues show that the environment is her big thing. Will be interesting to see how she answers the questionnaire.

I got the impression that part of the reason she spoke at last night’s SB meeting was that she preferred to communicate her positions directly, rather than have a group like “Voices of Fairfax” purport to collect and/or present her views.

Anonymous wrote:

believe PP just tossed that into the equation on his/her own. No candidate is on the record as having suggested including Forest Edge in any solution to the overcrowding at McLean or under-enrollment at Langley.

PP is a Tholen supporter. That's pretty clear. I don't think either of the candidates who mentioned IB think it is the solution. They were just looking for possibilities of alternatives. Remember, the SB was sending the message earlier that there would be no boundary change until OneFairfax was implemented. They have quickly changed their tune. McLean has been overcrowded for some time. And, please remember, Tholen was initially a strong OneFairfax supporter. She didn't change her tune until after it became clear the community was concerned. It was on her original website that she supported it.

I have no issue with candidates trying to show they can think outside the box. I’m less enamored of their suggestions when they are primarily intended to keep Langley happy by suggesting “solutions” that would only allow kids currently zoned for McLean to attend Langley as long as there’s capacity available at Langley. The message they seem to be sending is that, if Langley got crowded, they’d cut off access and send the McLean kids back to their trailers. Tholen seems to be looking for longer-term solutions that are fair to families in both school communities.

As for the prior SB discussions, it was not clear whether they wanted to put a McLean boundary study on hold until they’d done a county-wide boundary study or instead simply updated the boundary policy. I don’t think they really knew themselves, which is why some of the discussions earlier this year accomplished little. If the majority of the Board has now realized the downsides (both to students and to their political careers) of protracted delay, and are now ready to start doing something to address the overcrowding, that is a positive development. And it needn’t stop Buford, Karloutsos, or any other candidate from arguing that, had only they served on the School Board at the time, there would have been greater attention to the overcrowding situations and the delays would not have occurred.

Just looked at Tholen's website. Her background and issues show that the environment is her big thing. Will be interesting to see how she answers the questionnaire.

believe PP just tossed that into the equation on his/her own. No candidate is on the record as having suggested including Forest Edge in any solution to the overcrowding at McLean or under-enrollment at Langley.

PP is a Tholen supporter. That's pretty clear. I don't think either of the candidates who mentioned IB think it is the solution. They were just looking for possibilities of alternatives. Remember, the SB was sending the message earlier that there would be no boundary change until OneFairfax was implemented. They have quickly changed their tune. McLean has been overcrowded for some time. And, please remember, Tholen was initially a strong OneFairfax supporter. She didn't change her tune until after it became clear the community was concerned. It was on her original website that she supported it.

Anonymous wrote:If I had to do it all over again, I'd send my DCs to private schools. Already I've seen the tide shift; parents who can afford (or some who really can't) will send their children to private.

It used to be an easy decision; why pay for maybe subpar private schools in Fairfax County when we had top notch, top performing, nationally recognized public schools. Happy to see that those most frustrated parents are voting with their feet...

I’m not sure it’s a repudiation of public schools so much as a reflection that the wealthy in areas like McLean are getting wealthier.

However, if it’s contributed to the lower enrollment at Langley in recent years, the smarter thing might have been to renovate, but not substantially expand, Langley and then use the extra money on adding capacity where the enrollments are actually increasing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trying again to provide working link:

http://www.voicesoffairfax.org/candidates.html

Did not see one word about Forest Edge........

I believe PP just tossed that into the equation on his/her own. No candidate is on the record as having suggested including Forest Edge in any solution to the overcrowding at McLean or under-enrollment at Langley.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trying again to provide working link:

http://www.voicesoffairfax.org/candidates.html

Just read Buford's response. She is what we need on School Board. She did not push for IB at Langley, but was presenting several possibilities to handle it on a short-term basis. But, she also made it clear she supported boundary adjustment. Which, until the last week or so, the SB was refusing to consider. Why didn't SB push for this last year?

I haven't read the other responses yet

Perhaps she did not “push” for IB, but PP was correct that she mentioned it, as did Karloutsos, in her questionnaire response, and it’s not going to happen unless Langley parents ask to swap AP with IB. Not would adding IB really be a short-term response; instead, it would be a long-term commitment to an expensive academic program.

The CIPs have been alluding to potential boundary changes involving McLean and Langley for years. They tripped over their own feet earlier this year and omitted it from a list of priority boundary adjustments in the FY 2020-23 CIP, when it clearly should have been included. Between the continued growth in the McLean HS enrollment and the advocacy coming from groups like McSPaCES, they are now trying to make up for lost time.