Anonymous wrote:I have to laugh when I see WSHS families who benefitted from Jeff Platenberg’s largesse finally waking up to the fact that FCPS planning is atrocious.

Who is Jeff Platenberg?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.

Coates and park lawn boundary changes were delayed for the comprehensive boundary review. They delayed making changes to address actual needs at those schools to allow themselves to make unnecessary changes.

You can’t make this stuff up. Rank incompetence.

That is looking at something strategically and for a longer term rather than just fixing a pocket of need.

But they aren't looking at it from the longer term. The draft maps they've released look at the school populations for this year. And then they move kids around based on that. They're not looking at what happens in years after that, most likely because CIP numbers are notoriously incorrect. And if you're going to switch 30 kids from one school to another to "fix" overcrowding, that's a problem because the CIP numbers at some schools are routinely off more than that figure in any given year.

This is a mess. I have no problems with them doing a comprehensive review. But they seem to be using this as an opportunity to switch thousands of kids around to make things look better on paper, when the changes don't make sense in real life. And with no guaranteed grandfathering, they're just going to rip kids away from their communities and friends for no good reason.

Fix Coates and Park Lawn because those schools are legitimately overcrowded. But leave others alone unless there's a really pressing need for a change AND the community agrees with it.

Well, frankly, if you have no problem with a comprehensive review, then you only have yourself to blame. Sometimes people can be so dense…

I have to laugh when I see WSHS families who benefitted from Jeff Platenberg’s largesse finally waking up to the fact that FCPS planning is atrocious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.

Coates and park lawn boundary changes were delayed for the comprehensive boundary review. They delayed making changes to address actual needs at those schools to allow themselves to make unnecessary changes.

You can’t make this stuff up. Rank incompetence.

That is looking at something strategically and for a longer term rather than just fixing a pocket of need.

But they aren't looking at it from the longer term. The draft maps they've released look at the school populations for this year. And then they move kids around based on that. They're not looking at what happens in years after that, most likely because CIP numbers are notoriously incorrect. And if you're going to switch 30 kids from one school to another to "fix" overcrowding, that's a problem because the CIP numbers at some schools are routinely off more than that figure in any given year.

This is a mess. I have no problems with them doing a comprehensive review. But they seem to be using this as an opportunity to switch thousands of kids around to make things look better on paper, when the changes don't make sense in real life. And with no guaranteed grandfathering, they're just going to rip kids away from their communities and friends for no good reason.

Fix Coates and Park Lawn because those schools are legitimately overcrowded. But leave others alone unless there's a really pressing need for a change AND the community agrees with it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is interesting about Emerald Chase is that they are trying to use the process to move the boundary for the HS that they want, which isn't the move suggested or the current location. The problem is they want to move to one of the overcrowded HS and I don't see that happening. I think that bit of politicking is hurting them, but I get it. If FCPS is changing the boundaries, why not try and move to the HS that you are most interested in?

I think there are parents who have been fighting long before the boundary review process to have the high school changed to Chantilly. It's the closest to our neighborhood by far and that's where most of the kids from elementary school go. So it's my impression that it's not that this process came up and people saw an opportunity -- this has been an ongoing effort.

There’s a group of parents at Vienna ES doing something similar to try and get moved from Marshall to Madison. About 7% of Vienna ES feeds to Kilmer/Marshall and Thru is proposing to eliminate the split feeder and send them to Freedom Hill ES, which feeds 100% to Kilmer/Marshall. The parents are asking to stay at Vienna ES but get moved to Thoreau/Madison. It’s been on their radar for years and now they see an opportunity.

Cleaning up Vienna and Cunningham Park to make them straight Madison feeders makes a hell of a lot more sense then whatever they’re trying to do to pick up more Madison kids from Westbriar.

Why can’t they make Westbriar feed entirely to Marshall? If that means some Town of Vienna families go to Marshall, so be it.

I agree. A very small portion of TOV goes to Westbriar. It’s mostly the country club that falls within that region. If TOV feels strongly enough to have all of TOV attend Madison, they should look into moving the TOV parts of Westbriar to Vienna ES and Wolftrap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm getting lost in all these different discussions. Are there any communities who truly think their school is overcrowded and boundaries should be changed or are unhappy with a split feeder/attendance island and like the idea of realigning? Any at all?

We are at Irving/West Springfield, I have students at both schools. I am not in a house where there is a proposed boundary change (so I have no dog in the fight), but I don't think either school needs relief from crowding. They are full and large schools, but my kids are having good experiences and don't think the schools are over crowded. Their classrooms are reasonable size and always in a real classroom, the cafeteria has empty tables at every lunch, and it works.

So, no, I don't think anyone in our community was saying, "wow I really wish they'd relieve the overcrowding at our schools" and the boundary study and CIP predictions felt very out of the blue.

Different poster from the area.

There are also big drops in enrollment in that area which the CIP projections and the THRU numbers are completely ignoring.

FCPS CIP is using projections from some secret formula. Thru is only looking at school membership from September 2024. If you look at school membership beyond the current numbers, there is going to be a clear drop in enrollment.

Fall 2026, when rezoning is implemented, WSHS will have a fairly decent drop in enrollment when Class of 2026 graduates because the current Irving 7th grade is almost 140 fewer students, 718 for class of 2026 vs 581 for the current Irving 7th grade. Even if all 50-60 of the AAP kids return from Lake Braddock AAP along with the usual dozen Catholic school kids, there is still an enrollment drop of around 60-70 students.

The current 6th grade will make Irving a little bigger next year, but then there is a HUGE drop in the current 5th grade enrollment, who will be the 7th grade class when rezoning starts in 2026, and the 9th grade class in 2028.

Enrollment in that pyramid is with stable, or a steady decline after the 5th grade class, with another huge drop with the kindergarten class.

Thru did not take any of the immediate future enrollment drops or the long term enrollment drops into account when developing their rezoning plan. The used current membership, ie attendance, at each school based of fall 2024 numbers, which makes little sense because the rezoning affects 2026 and beyond.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.

Coates and park lawn boundary changes were delayed for the comprehensive boundary review. They delayed making changes to address actual needs at those schools to allow themselves to make unnecessary changes.

You can’t make this stuff up. Rank incompetence.

That is looking at something strategically and for a longer term rather than just fixing a pocket of need.

Sacrifice fixing an urgent problem to make changes that create more problems.

Gatehouse at its finest, folks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is interesting about Emerald Chase is that they are trying to use the process to move the boundary for the HS that they want, which isn't the move suggested or the current location. The problem is they want to move to one of the overcrowded HS and I don't see that happening. I think that bit of politicking is hurting them, but I get it. If FCPS is changing the boundaries, why not try and move to the HS that you are most interested in?

I think there are parents who have been fighting long before the boundary review process to have the high school changed to Chantilly. It's the closest to our neighborhood by far and that's where most of the kids from elementary school go. So it's my impression that it's not that this process came up and people saw an opportunity -- this has been an ongoing effort.

There’s a group of parents at Vienna ES doing something similar to try and get moved from Marshall to Madison. About 7% of Vienna ES feeds to Kilmer/Marshall and Thru is proposing to eliminate the split feeder and send them to Freedom Hill ES, which feeds 100% to Kilmer/Marshall. The parents are asking to stay at Vienna ES but get moved to Thoreau/Madison. It’s been on their radar for years and now they see an opportunity.

Cleaning up Vienna and Cunningham Park to make them straight Madison feeders makes a hell of a lot more sense then whatever they’re trying to do to pick up more Madison kids from Westbriar.

Why can’t they make Westbriar feed entirely to Marshall? If that means some Town of Vienna families go to Marshall, so be it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.

Coates and park lawn boundary changes were delayed for the comprehensive boundary review. They delayed making changes to address actual needs at those schools to allow themselves to make unnecessary changes.

You can’t make this stuff up. Rank incompetence.

That is looking at something strategically and for a longer term rather than just fixing a pocket of need.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.

Coates and park lawn boundary changes were delayed for the comprehensive boundary review. They delayed making changes to address actual needs at those schools to allow themselves to make unnecessary changes.

You can’t make this stuff up. Rank incompetence.

Emerald Chase parent here. Long story short, we love Oak Hill. It’s the closest school to our community and our kids are able to bike/walk there. We recently lived through an expansion/renovation so there are no capacity issues. I would like my kids to be able to stay with their friends through their school careers. So if the rest of Oak Hill went to Carson and Westfield, I would be happy, I am not looking to “trade up” to Chantilly like some are implying. Westfield is a great school. If we aren’t able to keep the Oak Hill kids together this round of rezoning due to capacity issues, I’d rather we just keep the status quo and revisit in 5 years to see what capacity looks like.

Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

I would argue that adjusting school boundaries won’t improve the overall logistics of FCPS one bit. It actually enables them to continue to misallocate capital resources and then cover up their mistakes by moving kids around like widgets.

Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.

I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is interesting about Emerald Chase is that they are trying to use the process to move the boundary for the HS that they want, which isn't the move suggested or the current location. The problem is they want to move to one of the overcrowded HS and I don't see that happening. I think that bit of politicking is hurting them, but I get it. If FCPS is changing the boundaries, why not try and move to the HS that you are most interested in?

I think there are parents who have been fighting long before the boundary review process to have the high school changed to Chantilly. It's the closest to our neighborhood by far and that's where most of the kids from elementary school go. So it's my impression that it's not that this process came up and people saw an opportunity -- this has been an ongoing effort.

I understand that. But, you do realize that the options on Thru involved moving closer neighborhoods out of Chantilly? and, those neighborhoods currently are in Chantilly and want to stay there.

You need to be realistic.

Well, the website advocating a move to Chantilly is down. So I don't know if there is an organized effort to move there anymore.