Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To All of the posters stating they don't have a dog in this fight, that they don't have units in play...


That doesn't fly. This is an opportunity to get Buckingham and the western end of Columbia Pike moved away from WL. Of course that affects you, and your property values. Not saying that's everyone's agenda, but there are few regulars here that very much want that. I was having issues with the tool yesterday, and got busy doing other things. Does it show you what it does to the total demographics of the school after units are moved?

If someone lives in the upper most part of Arlington (so go to Yorktown and Williamsburg), their kids will very unlikely get moved to schools further south. How does that impact their property values if kids closer to Wakefield go to that school? What planning unit are you in?

If someone lives in Lyon village they have an opportunity to purge WL of some their least advantaged students.

Ok, sure. But my point was that not all people care or have an agenda. If my kids live closer to one HS, then wanting them to go there shouldn't be a basis for others to call "racism."

There are about 1800 students in the 51 planning units and only about 100 ea. year that will be moving out of WL. Already this is getting pretty ugly. What would happen if we could get a 4th comprehensive HS? I've heard VHC Carlin Springs as one solution and others have suggested using Jefferson as a HS and then moving Jefferson MS to the VHC spot (b/c of needing a larger foot print for a HS).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To All of the posters stating they don't have a dog in this fight, that they don't have units in play...


That doesn't fly. This is an opportunity to get Buckingham and the western end of Columbia Pike moved away from WL. Of course that affects you, and your property values. Not saying that's everyone's agenda, but there are few regulars here that very much want that. I was having issues with the tool yesterday, and got busy doing other things. Does it show you what it does to the total demographics of the school after units are moved?

If someone lives in the upper most part of Arlington (so go to Yorktown and Williamsburg), their kids will very unlikely get moved to schools further south. How does that impact their property values if kids closer to Wakefield go to that school? What planning unit are you in?

If someone lives in Lyon village they have an opportunity to purge WL of some their least advantaged students.

Anonymous wrote:To All of the posters stating they don't have a dog in this fight, that they don't have units in play...


That doesn't fly. This is an opportunity to get Buckingham and the western end of Columbia Pike moved away from WL. Of course that affects you, and your property values. Not saying that's everyone's agenda, but there are few regulars here that very much want that. I was having issues with the tool yesterday, and got busy doing other things. Does it show you what it does to the total demographics of the school after units are moved?

If someone lives in the upper most part of Arlington (so go to Yorktown and Williamsburg), their kids will very unlikely get moved to schools further south. How does that impact their property values if kids closer to Wakefield go to that school? What planning unit are you in?

Anonymous wrote:Here's my problem. I've tried this 100 different ways, and I cannot get the numbers "green" across all years without moving at least one of the 35xx units (the ones closest to Wakefield on Columbia Pike). Moving any other combination gets me either too few kids in 2017 or too many in 2020. This is because most PLs have very few kids who will move for the 2017 year except those very densely populated units.

Has anyone been able to do this? Make numbers green for every year and NOT move at least one of these units?

Merely trying to get the numbers to work for that option!

I had the same issue. I think I had to move the closest one to WL--it's 3506, I believe to make the numbers work.

People who think that social justice is the main factor that should be driving school boundaries should not just call others racist who prioritize other factors such as proximity, alignment and efficiency.

It was also interesting to hear from a dad last night who lives in the Yorktown Island. He mentioned that a lot of the socioeconomic diversity of those planning units had changed due to lower income residents being priced out, and he wondered why it should stay the same when his house was only a little more than 1 mile from WL. He said the kids who live there and don't do sports come home and then are isolated from the rest of their classmates at Yorktown. Obviously, he sees value in proximity and contiguity.

I was watching the 10/6 SB meeting the other night, where one N. Arlington mom whose daughter goes to Yorktown bemoaned the fact that her school wasn't diverse. Well, there is always the option of requesting a transfer to Wakefield. Why should other kids be bused across town just so that mom can feel less guilty about the fact that they chose to live in a mostly white school boundary? I think the African American SB member alluded to that when he made a comment at another prior SB meeting that not everyone wanted to be bused. (And before anyone cry racist b/c I don't know his name, I don't know the other SB members' names either. My kids have not started K yet.).

Finally, if you watched the meeting last night, you probably heard that there isn't priority over one factor. They asked everyone to provide their thoughts on how to rebalance the schools.

To All of the posters stating they don't have a dog in this fight, that they don't have units in play...


That doesn't fly. This is an opportunity to get Buckingham and the western end of Columbia Pike moved away from WL. Of course that affects you, and your property values. Not saying that's everyone's agenda, but there are few regulars here that very much want that. I was having issues with the tool yesterday, and got busy doing other things. Does it show you what it does to the total demographics of the school after units are moved?

Here's my problem. I've tried this 100 different ways, and I cannot get the numbers "green" across all years without moving at least one of the 35xx units (the ones closest to Wakefield on Columbia Pike). Moving any other combination gets me either too few kids in 2017 or too many in 2020. This is because most PLs have very few kids who will move for the 2017 year except those very densely populated units.

Has anyone been able to do this? Make numbers green for every year and NOT move at least one of these units?

Merely trying to get the numbers to work for that option!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I bridged the Yorktown island and gave Yorktown a few additional units along the west county border but stopped at Route 50. I gave Wakefield Ft Myer and some units around the east end of Columbia Pike.

I moved 1302, 1303, 1304, 2312, 2313, 2314, and 2401 to Yorktown.

And I moved 3706, 4611, 4612, 4614, 4691, 4815, 4816, 4818, 4828, 4829, and 4899 to Wakefield.

I ended up with most year capacities under or close to 102 with only a couple years at 104 but that was my highest in any school. My goal was to end up with sustainable numbers and with my boundaries they all looked pretty good (104 or less) four years out.

I know you got the capacities close to 102 but isn't it farther for the planning units you selected to get to Wakefield? Or were you looking at other criteria as well and not just the capacity issue?

Maybe, just maybe the PP had the thought not to send the 386 economically disadvantaged students in planning units 3506, 3507, 3508, 3509, and 3510 to the school that already has 49% of its students qualifying for FARMs. Or maybe, just maybe, the PP thought it might be poor form to send 318 Hispanic students to the school that is 44.3% Hispanic.

Did none of you read the recent Washington Post article written when Loudoun tried to do the same thing and was publicly shamed into backtracking? Are we trying to make front page news as the most overtly racist/classist Virginian county? Maybe the DOJ doesn't have anything better to do with their time this year, because I have a feeling they will be hearing about this.

PP above, you really need to calm down. I am the one who asked the OP above if he/she had based it on other factors other than just 102%. I was having difficulty with the tool last night, so I couldn't really navigate the tool as well as I can from the computer I am using today. I haven't even looked at any demographics, so seriously, you shouldn't jump to any conclusions. Further, I am not even involved in any of the planning units that the OP describes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

Sorry, but it is an issue of social justice, not something that is "nice to have" when it is convenient for YOU. Also, your deed did not confer access to any school or any program in perpetuity.

Never said it did, but I am simply saying that people aren't horrible racist pigs for not placing diversity as first on their list. The County may end up deciding that diversity is its overall #1 factor, but on an individual level each family is going to provide the input that they believe best serves their kids whatever that may mean. Again, my planning unit isn't moving so this doesn't directly impact me.

+1

+1

I was focused on having children stick with neighborhoods/communities. Neighborhoods are a big thing in Arlington if you haven't noticed.

-"mixed" planning unit not in play

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

Sorry, but it is an issue of social justice, not something that is "nice to have" when it is convenient for YOU. Also, your deed did not confer access to any school or any program in perpetuity.

Never said it did, but I am simply saying that people aren't horrible racist pigs for not placing diversity as first on their list. The County may end up deciding that diversity is its overall #1 factor, but on an individual level each family is going to provide the input that they believe best serves their kids whatever that may mean. Again, my planning unit isn't moving so this doesn't directly impact me.

No, but this is why the leaders should just lead and not leave it up to the self-interested public.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

And that, folks, is the definition of white privilege.

Exactly

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

Sorry, but it is an issue of social justice, not something that is "nice to have" when it is convenient for YOU. Also, your deed did not confer access to any school or any program in perpetuity.

Never said it did, but I am simply saying that people aren't horrible racist pigs for not placing diversity as first on their list. The County may end up deciding that diversity is its overall #1 factor, but on an individual level each family is going to provide the input that they believe best serves their kids whatever that may mean. Again, my planning unit isn't moving so this doesn't directly impact me.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

Sorry, but it is an issue of social justice, not something that is "nice to have" when it is convenient for YOU. Also, your deed did not confer access to any school or any program in perpetuity.

Never said it did, but I am simply saying that people aren't horrible racist pigs for not placing diversity as first on their list. The County may end up deciding that diversity is its overall #1 factor, but on an individual level each family is going to provide the input that they believe best serves their kids whatever that may mean. Again, my planning unit isn't moving so this doesn't directly impact me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I agree. Leaders should lead and make the unpopular decisions, instead of leaving it to a community that thinks nothing of segregation when little Johnny may not get to go all the way through ES, MS, and HS with all of the same kids.

Oh please don't sound so holier than thou. It's not wrong that many people don't put demographic diversity at the top of their list when balancing multiple competing factors. To me it's a nice-to-have, for my own child I have other factors that are more important. In this case, many families zoned for W-L worry about losing IB access, which was a prime reason they bought in a W-L zone. For some, they do want community continuity for their children and families. For some, they see no reason to attend a school 50% further away when there is at least one and possibly two HS closer. And yes, some people do look at a school's performance or FARMS rate and want to send their kid to a school that is already high-performing rather than having their kid be one of those there to help improve it.

FWIW, My planning unit is not in play this go-around but I'm watching the issue closely.

And that, folks, is the definition of white privilege.