Anonymous wrote:I hate that they are bringing public into this. You are there to make the best decisions for the county schools; not listen to a bunch of self interest serving parents. Make the best choices and we will live with it.

Agreed. They should have drafted plans to explore as a school board based on a specific criteria and then made a decision. Very few people want to change schools, the vast majority of people are happy with their school. The ones who want to move are normally at high FARMs schools and would be happy to move to a less poor school or at an IB school and want an AP school.

The families that I know at impoverished schools seem to be happy there and are more miffed that people look down on their schools. They find it offensive that people are so loudly trying to avoid their kids school where their kids are having a great experience.

Making this process a public one was destined to lead to disaster. And guess what happened?

That said, some of the original goals of the redistricting needed to be changed. The focus should have been on relieving the over crowding at schools and ending split feeders where they could.

That’s the thing we will have 48 hours from map to public comment

Anonymous wrote:So scenario 4 is basically what we’re going with to try to get approved and finalized, right?

There are obviously revisions to Scenario 4. They are just keeping them under wraps so they can meet their timetable of a January 2026 board meeting to approve the final changes.

So scenario 4 is basically what we’re going with to try to get approved and finalized, right?

It makes no sense to give all these different proposals, put them out for response and then to present something different with no response.

They should have presented proposals and asked for response--and made decisions based on the validity of the justification of the responses. I do think it reasonable to give liberal pupil placement to siblings.
Complaining about the demographics of another school is not a good justification.

Anonymous wrote:I hate that they are bringing public into this. You are there to make the best decisions for the county schools; not listen to a bunch of self interest serving parents. Make the best choices and we will live with it.

The best choices are determined based on input from constituents, who in this case overwhelmingly showed that we don’t want the comprehensive changes.

I think you’re thinking of a junta.

Anything can be changed. With our without previously presented so be ready and waiting.

In the community meetings about scenario 4 there were a lot of people speaking and introducing new change ideas….thats what gives me pause.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the update is no update…really hoping not for a 11th hour surprise on Jan 8

Out of curiosity, are you hoping for no changes because you are not moved in scenario 4 (and want to stay) or because you are moved in scenario 4 (and want to move)?

I’m not that PP but I think it’s easy to imagine different maps from any of the previous “scenarios.” Even if it’s just small changes here or there, if it’s your neighborhood impacted where it wasn’t before, that is a big change.

Exactly. And if you are impacted you’ll have just two days to get the word out to neighbors. Didn’t they just do this with Bren Mahr and had to push the whole thing off for 5 years because they didn’t give the public enough notice?

Yes, except they said they still plan to move ahead with some other changes presented at the same time, even if they don’t go ahead with the Bren Mar Park ES proposals.

It’s likely that many of those others affected in the Justice HS pyramid are still unaware of these changes that could affect their MS and/or HS assignments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the update is no update…really hoping not for a 11th hour surprise on Jan 8

Out of curiosity, are you hoping for no changes because you are not moved in scenario 4 (and want to stay) or because you are moved in scenario 4 (and want to move)?

I’m not that PP but I think it’s easy to imagine different maps from any of the previous “scenarios.” Even if it’s just small changes here or there, if it’s your neighborhood impacted where it wasn’t before, that is a big change.

Exactly. And if you are impacted you’ll have just two days to get the word out to neighbors. Didn’t they just do this with Bren Mahr and had to push the whole thing off for 5 years because they didn’t give the public enough notice?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the update is no update…really hoping not for a 11th hour surprise on Jan 8

Out of curiosity, are you hoping for no changes because you are not moved in scenario 4 (and want to stay) or because you are moved in scenario 4 (and want to move)?

I’m not that PP but I think it’s easy to imagine different maps from any of the previous “scenarios.” Even if it’s just small changes here or there, if it’s your neighborhood impacted where it wasn’t before, that is a big change.

Anonymous wrote:So the update is no update…really hoping not for a 11th hour surprise on Jan 8

Out of curiosity, are you hoping for no changes because you are not moved in scenario 4 (and want to stay) or because you are moved in scenario 4 (and want to move)?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They posted it but there’s nothing new here.

https://www.fcps.edu/december-12-2025-superintendents-boundary-review-advisory-committee-meeting

This meeting was after the community meeting about Lewis boundaries. And that isn’t mentioned in here anywhere?

Nope.

The just posted the agenda, plus the same timeline they have been posting repeatedly.

They really dropped any pretense at transparency over the past month.

Michelle Reid is such a fraud.

Looks like we won’t get a new map until Jan when she releases her map to the school board. I guess we’ll see it then? Maybe not.

They've had multiple meetings now where Reid has not disclosed changes shared with or proposed by the BRAC.

I'm sure the lack of transparency is what Sandy Anderson wants, too. They are both pathetic.

Grumble grumble, Sandy Anderson, grumble grumble.

Grumble grumble, its grumble lady again. It's literally the only thing your say. Get a life.

I am not grumble lady. But I am 100% imitating grumble lady.

Ok. You are redeemed. But nonetheless, I'm siding with the poster who said Sandy Anderson sucks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They posted it but there’s nothing new here.

https://www.fcps.edu/december-12-2025-superintendents-boundary-review-advisory-committee-meeting

This meeting was after the community meeting about Lewis boundaries. And that isn’t mentioned in here anywhere?

Nope.

The just posted the agenda, plus the same timeline they have been posting repeatedly.

They really dropped any pretense at transparency over the past month.

Michelle Reid is such a fraud.

Looks like we won’t get a new map until Jan when she releases her map to the school board. I guess we’ll see it then? Maybe not.

They've had multiple meetings now where Reid has not disclosed changes shared with or proposed by the BRAC.

I'm sure the lack of transparency is what Sandy Anderson wants, too. They are both pathetic.

Grumble grumble, Sandy Anderson, grumble grumble.

Grumble grumble, its grumble lady again. It's literally the only thing your say. Get a life.

I am not grumble lady. But I am 100% imitating grumble lady.

So the update is no update…really hoping not for a 11th hour surprise on Jan 8