Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.
A Cherrydale centered PTA with participants who did not have students attending the school.
Further, that Cherrydale focused PTA were lottery parents; do think of the Rosslyn PTA members were advocating to the school board to remove lottery families, there would not have been a similar response?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I just think it's weird to start parsing what individuals worked on on what issues when it comes to closing a school. Nottingham doesn't want to be an option school. Either does Tuckahoe or Jamestown or Barcroft for that matter. Nobody wants their school eliminated. (Except, according to you, people who will go to Reed. I don't actually believe that they would advocate to take away a school they currently attend, but hey, maybe you know more than I do about it.)
I don't know why you think it's weird that people in Westover would prefer a decision that lets them go to Reed instead of Tuckahoe or Nottingham. It's no different from the Rosslyn folks who want the immersion program to move so they could go to Key as a walkable school or the Bluemont folks who want ATS to become a neighborhood school.
Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.
Anonymous wrote:I just think it's weird to start parsing what individuals worked on on what issues when it comes to closing a school. Nottingham doesn't want to be an option school. Either does Tuckahoe or Jamestown or Barcroft for that matter. Nobody wants their school eliminated. (Except, according to you, people who will go to Reed. I don't actually believe that they would advocate to take away a school they currently attend, but hey, maybe you know more than I do about it.)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.
I also didn't realize that the Buck property suggestion was a real thing they actually presented to the board. There are a number of scenarios that could realistically play out, but having a special temporary swing space especially for ASFS does not sound even remotely plausible.
You're right, it's not plausible if for no other reason because there's no way to fund it. A temporary space wouldn't have the life expectancy to be eligible for bond funding and APS doesn't have a spare $15-20 million sitting around and no clue what to spend it on.
Anonymous wrote:I just think it's weird to start parsing what individuals worked on on what issues when it comes to closing a school. Nottingham doesn't want to be an option school. Either does Tuckahoe or Jamestown or Barcroft for that matter. Nobody wants their school eliminated. (Except, according to you, people who will go to Reed. I don't actually believe that they would advocate to take away a school they currently attend, but hey, maybe you know more than I do about it.)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.
I also didn't realize that the Buck property suggestion was a real thing they actually presented to the board. There are a number of scenarios that could realistically play out, but having a special temporary swing space especially for ASFS does not sound even remotely plausible.
Anonymous wrote:You mean Nottingham.
Anonymous wrote:What's really interesting is that if you just read the comments in this thread without knowing what actually happened in the election, you get the impression the Cherrydale people flocked to the meeting to vote out Rosslyn people and get a Cherrydale-centered PTA board that would push for a walk zone. In reality, it appears that it was Rosslyn people who flocked to the meeting to vote out Cherrydale-area board members in favor of Rosslyn people.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The ASFS PTA meeting minutes from last year are an interesting read (just the External Affairs reports, you can skip the rest). I hadn't realized until I just read them how heavily the PTA advocated to prevent a Key/ASFS swap, reduce the size of the school and create as large a walk zone as possible, all of which would result in Rosslyn being zoned out of the school. I get where they're coming from, but I can also totally understand why the Rosslyn folks were up in arms and voted out the External Affairs person in favor of one of their own.
PP again. It reminds me a bit of what Tuckahoe did, when their board went to battle to get Tuckahoe off the list of potential option sites because all of their board members were in the walk zone and they weren't concerned with how that decision would affect their community members on the other side of Lee Highway who might not get to go to Reed like they'd prefer as a result.
-----------------
That's a weird statement. Do people south of Lee Highway need Tuckahoe to be turned into an option school in order be zoned to Reed? That's not my understanding. I'm a Tuckahoe parent and I never heard anyone at Tuckahoe object to Tuckahoe's position that they shouldn't turn it into an option school. There was no revolt in the PTA; not even a dissenting voice from what I heard. Just like no one at Nottingham wanted it turned option. Who would?