Anonymous wrote:Class size was the number one complaint on that website survey to Dr. Garza. Is she not listening or is this just another scare tactic the school board is using to get more money from the BOS. Already people are moving from Fairfax to other neighboring counties because of the class size.

Anonymous wrote:First, FCPS needs to be open about the costs. The budget is not available to the public in detail. For example, what is the cost of AAP busing? How do you know it is not significant?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Still think it would be a reduction in bus costs if AAP kids were at base school. My kid could walk to our elementary but had to be bussed to a center. Sorry. I know folks will defend this program till their dying day, but in many areas, these needs could be served more than adequately at their base school if parents weren't so reluctant to let go of the idea that their precious can't be rubbing elbows with all the kids in his/her community (which is kinda how life is when you think of it).

+1000

any kid who lives close to a school can walk there. Has nothing to do with AAP. My kid was bussed to the local school before getting ito AAP, and is now bussed to the Center. Really no difference.

You misunderstand. My son didn't need or qualify for transportation when he went to our base school, which was about a block away. He did require transportation and thus became an additional cost to the county when he got into AAP and moved to a school across town. So you can't say that if you moved all AAP kids back to base schools they would necessarily need more buses. It's not net/net.

but if the local schools are full how are they going to absorb all these new kids coming back from the Centers?

o.k., but exploring boundary shifts is a whole different thing thatn cutting AAP. Maybe just redraw some maps and solve this bussing question.

Some local schools are full, some aren't. This is something that needs to be addressed over the long-term as other posters have noted with boundary shifts and new schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree about FLES cut. Nice to have program. With the budget money like it is, it has to go. Kids do not learn language with a class once or twice a week.

Agreed. And I say this as someone whose kids were born overseas and spent a significant portion of their lives in a non-English-speaking country. I hated when we moved back here and my kids couldn't continue their language in FCPS. But given that they couldn't have taken a language until 8th grade either way, it hasn't made that much of a difference. It would be one thing if foreign language was in all the schools, but again when you're making hard choices that could affect all students getting essential services is it really fair or sensible to have foreign language in some but not all schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Still think it would be a reduction in bus costs if AAP kids were at base school. My kid could walk to our elementary but had to be bussed to a center. Sorry. I know folks will defend this program till their dying day, but in many areas, these needs could be served more than adequately at their base school if parents weren't so reluctant to let go of the idea that their precious can't be rubbing elbows with all the kids in his/her community (which is kinda how life is when you think of it).

+1000

any kid who lives close to a school can walk there. Has nothing to do with AAP. My kid was bussed to the local school before getting ito AAP, and is now bussed to the Center. Really no difference.

You misunderstand. My son didn't need or qualify for transportation when he went to our base school, which was about a block away. He did require transportation and thus became an additional cost to the county when he got into AAP and moved to a school across town. So you can't say that if you moved all AAP kids back to base schools they would necessarily need more buses. It's not net/net.

but if the local schools are full how are they going to absorb all these new kids coming back from the Centers?

Anonymous wrote:Agree about FLES cut. Nice to have program. With the budget money like it is, it has to go. Kids do not learn language with a class once or twice a week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Still think it would be a reduction in bus costs if AAP kids were at base school. My kid could walk to our elementary but had to be bussed to a center. Sorry. I know folks will defend this program till their dying day, but in many areas, these needs could be served more than adequately at their base school if parents weren't so reluctant to let go of the idea that their precious can't be rubbing elbows with all the kids in his/her community (which is kinda how life is when you think of it).

+1000

any kid who lives close to a school can walk there. Has nothing to do with AAP. My kid was bussed to the local school before getting ito AAP, and is now bussed to the Center. Really no difference.

You misunderstand. My son didn't need or qualify for transportation when he went to our base school, which was about a block away. He did require transportation and thus became an additional cost to the county when he got into AAP and moved to a school across town. So you can't say that if you moved all AAP kids back to base schools they would necessarily need more buses. It's not net/net.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Still think it would be a reduction in bus costs if AAP kids were at base school. My kid could walk to our elementary but had to be bussed to a center. Sorry. I know folks will defend this program till their dying day, but in many areas, these needs could be served more than adequately at their base school if parents weren't so reluctant to let go of the idea that their precious can't be rubbing elbows with all the kids in his/her community (which is kinda how life is when you think of it).

+1000

any kid who lives close to a school can walk there. Has nothing to do with AAP. My kid was bussed to the local school before getting ito AAP, and is now bussed to the Center. Really no difference.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not only that, but, in most cases, the AAP school is a further distance away=more mileage+ more bus drivers+more buses......

PPs are not saying the cost would be nil, just that it wouldn't be significant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm correcting my previous post. DOn't know why they are on FY 15 but the $27 million figure is correct.

I assume they're offering health insurance to more workers per the employer mandate, and that explains the cost, not some rate increase.

Write to your school board member and ask them why the dramatic increase in costs....
As a former employee in FCPS, I can tell you that many of the FCPS employees are not covered under FCPS' plans.... many are military dependents (spouses) and are covered under the military plan or under their spouse's plan.
BTW - they are on FY 15 because they begin the budget process more than a full year ahead of the fiscal year. It will not be approved until the spring.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would assume most cuts would be to non-essential programs like AAP?

How much more does AAP cost? The students are still there and they still need to have teachers. They still take art, music, PE....... They still have access to the library.... The additional bussing cost is where the savings would be and that is a drop in the bucket. (No dog in the AAP fight.)

Anonymous wrote:

Still think it would be a reduction in bus costs if AAP kids were at base school. My kid could walk to our elementary but had to be bussed to a center. Sorry. I know folks will defend this program till their dying day, but in many areas, these needs could be served more than adequately at their base school if parents weren't so reluctant to let go of the idea that their precious can't be rubbing elbows with all the kids in his/her community (which is kinda how life is when you think of it).

+1000