Just think, this time Wednesday we'll all know how it ended.

Out of curiosity, why did Vinson Palathingal recently say he’d rather keep kids in trailers than change boundaries? Is that now Karloutsos’s view as well? How many trailers would that mean at McLean next year - 22?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's going around like wildfire that Elaine knew all about this and never said anything about it.

It's fine if she really believed in moving kids around for "equity", but that contradicts what she's been saying.

Wildfire.

school board is a big mess...all waste space except for mclaughlin, moon, strauss, Wilson . Just watched resource stewardship and Keyes Gamarra brought up prayer and yoga space in bricks and mortar buildings while knowing the massive trailer parks...they don't even ask about net trailers on this bond since some schools projects only reduce trailers because the school would not have a boundary change.

If Mclean got an addition and 18 trailers were then gone it's a false stat since the trailers could have been eliminated by a boundary change. Another false stat is when a school is under renovation it needs more trailers since contractors are working. FCPS includes those in trailer reduction.

Anonymous wrote:It's going around like wildfire that Elaine knew all about this and never said anything about it.

It's fine if she really believed in moving kids around for "equity", but that contradicts what she's been saying.

Wildfire.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The South Lakes redistricting was 12 years ago. Try to move on like others have. Not every decision will make everyone happy.

You didn't get the point. The point was that families don't want boundary changes even when it is to a "better" school like Oakton. And, there are good reasons.

I understood your point. It doesn’t have the same impact when it was 12 years ago and most of the affected neighborhoods are now happily at South Lakes. Nor does it have much relevance to the Dranesville race, when only two of the current SB members were on the Board and neither is seeking re-election.

But, please, keep nursing your ancient wounds and ignoring the real lesson from the South Lakes situation, which is that change is hard but sometimes necessary. If you can’t come to terms with that, maybe you can move to Falls Church City. Arlington and Montgomery change boundaries as often as Fairfax, and Loudoun and Prince William change them more frequently.

Nope. You don't get it. I have no "wounds"--in fact, my neighborhood stayed put. My point was about Chantilly kids moving to Oakton. You know--from a lower SES school to a "better" one. My kids had friends that were moved. PP had claims that Langley parents are upset about moving to Herndon. My point is that it likely has nothing to do with Herndon and everything to do with wanting to stay put. But, you keep blaming everything on racism. I get it. And, FWIW, my neighborhood was successful in staying put. We weren't moved, so I have no "wounds" as you claim.

No one has yet explained what Herndon is going to do with extra kids.

This, exactly. It’s a fever dream for some of these “progressives”. They desperately want to socially engineer the Langley/Herndon boundary, no matter that it makes zero sense. Now, if Herndon was under enrolled and Langley was over enrolled , then yes - moving kids from Langley to Herndon would make perfect sense. But that’s exactly the opposite situation.

Such a straw-man argument. No one plans to move any Langley kids to Herndon now.

If there were a new high school in a decade in western Fairfax, of course all the boundaries there might change. At that point it would be stupid to keep busing kids 12 miles to Langley, if there were closer options.

Grow up. We are tired of your whining and stupid You Tube videos.

How about YOU grow up? The only reason people have been talking about this is because the SB was caught on video discussing this potential option. Now that it’s gotten out, they have realized what an absurd idea it was. It wouldn’t have been publicized had some astute parents not caught on and exposed the SB. I’m grateful that they did.

So you admit this “potential option” only really came up in the context of what may happen if another high school gets built in western Fairfax in a decade or so? Maybe in 2023 the uptight Great Falls parents will be able to find a more timely concern to obsess about.

One more day.

I'm sorry for you if you hate democracy so much that you don't want to let the facts get in the way of the Democratic party's "entitlement" to control the school board. The only ones obsessing are the board members an the other supporters of a faith in "equity" that isn't backed by a shred of evidence. There. Is. No. Evidence. that socioeconomic "equity" improves student achievement. None. Period.

Others beg to differ; for example:

https://www.ed.gov/diversity-opportunity

https://tcf.org/content/facts/the-benefits-of-socioeconomically-and-racially-integrated-schools-and-classrooms/?session=1

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_students_benefit_from_school_diversity

https://sudikoff.gseis.ucla.edu/ethnic-diversity-in-schools-benefits-everyone/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.virginia.edu/content/understanding-benefits-school-diversity-majority-minority-age%3famp

Anonymous wrote:There was nothing in the draft policy that indicated that the consideration of SES should take priority over the other four considerations and, more importantly, those considerations would only come into play after there had been a threshold determination that there was a need for a boundary adjustment based on specified criteria, including having an overcrowded or under-enrolled school, or opening a new school.

Clearly they could have moved sooner to balance the enrollments at Langley and McLean, and for sure some of the delay related to the consideration of revisions to P8130.7, but also keep in mind:

- Langley’s renovations weren’t finished until August 2018;
- McLean’s enrollment, while growing, didn’t really spike until the fall of 2018;
- Strauss, knowing boundary changes are always controversial, probably thought at first she could pass the matter off to her successor;
- Other School Board members wanted other boundary changes in the pipeline to get attention first;
- Brabrand has halted smaller “administrative” changes because he saw abuses and a lack of transparency; and
- Strauss didn’t do enough leg work in January 2019 to explain the basis for her proposal the first time she tried to get a Langley/McLean boundary study included among the priority boundary adjustments in the current CIP.

Lots of areas where there is room for improvement, but most of it has relatively little to do with One Fairfax.

SES was #! in the draft policy. Period.

Republicans and One Fairfax people must be really worried about tomorrow’s election results - they’ve been in overdrive all weekend spreading hysterical hyperbole all over the Internet.

As an "equity" specialist said in the Post, no one has any idea what they're doing.

lol.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The South Lakes redistricting was 12 years ago. Try to move on like others have. Not every decision will make everyone happy.

You didn't get the point. The point was that families don't want boundary changes even when it is to a "better" school like Oakton. And, there are good reasons.

I understood your point. It doesn’t have the same impact when it was 12 years ago and most of the affected neighborhoods are now happily at South Lakes. Nor does it have much relevance to the Dranesville race, when only two of the current SB members were on the Board and neither is seeking re-election.

But, please, keep nursing your ancient wounds and ignoring the real lesson from the South Lakes situation, which is that change is hard but sometimes necessary. If you can’t come to terms with that, maybe you can move to Falls Church City. Arlington and Montgomery change boundaries as often as Fairfax, and Loudoun and Prince William change them more frequently.

Nope. You don't get it. I have no "wounds"--in fact, my neighborhood stayed put. My point was about Chantilly kids moving to Oakton. You know--from a lower SES school to a "better" one. My kids had friends that were moved. PP had claims that Langley parents are upset about moving to Herndon. My point is that it likely has nothing to do with Herndon and everything to do with wanting to stay put. But, you keep blaming everything on racism. I get it. And, FWIW, my neighborhood was successful in staying put. We weren't moved, so I have no "wounds" as you claim.

No one has yet explained what Herndon is going to do with extra kids.

This, exactly. It’s a fever dream for some of these “progressives”. They desperately want to socially engineer the Langley/Herndon boundary, no matter that it makes zero sense. Now, if Herndon was under enrolled and Langley was over enrolled , then yes - moving kids from Langley to Herndon would make perfect sense. But that’s exactly the opposite situation.

Such a straw-man argument. No one plans to move any Langley kids to Herndon now.

If there were a new high school in a decade in western Fairfax, of course all the boundaries there might change. At that point it would be stupid to keep busing kids 12 miles to Langley, if there were closer options.

Grow up. We are tired of your whining and stupid You Tube videos.

How about YOU grow up? The only reason people have been talking about this is because the SB was caught on video discussing this potential option. Now that it’s gotten out, they have realized what an absurd idea it was. It wouldn’t have been publicized had some astute parents not caught on and exposed the SB. I’m grateful that they did.

So you admit this “potential option” only really came up in the context of what may happen if another high school gets built in western Fairfax in a decade or so? Maybe in 2023 the uptight Great Falls parents will be able to find a more timely concern to obsess about.

One more day.

I'm sorry for you if you hate democracy so much that you don't want to let the facts get in the way of the Democratic party's "entitlement" to control the school board. The only ones obsessing are the board members an the other supporters of a faith in "equity" that isn't backed by a shred of evidence. There. Is. No. Evidence. that socioeconomic "equity" improves student achievement. None. Period.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The South Lakes redistricting was 12 years ago. Try to move on like others have. Not every decision will make everyone happy.

You didn't get the point. The point was that families don't want boundary changes even when it is to a "better" school like Oakton. And, there are good reasons.

I understood your point. It doesn’t have the same impact when it was 12 years ago and most of the affected neighborhoods are now happily at South Lakes. Nor does it have much relevance to the Dranesville race, when only two of the current SB members were on the Board and neither is seeking re-election.

But, please, keep nursing your ancient wounds and ignoring the real lesson from the South Lakes situation, which is that change is hard but sometimes necessary. If you can’t come to terms with that, maybe you can move to Falls Church City. Arlington and Montgomery change boundaries as often as Fairfax, and Loudoun and Prince William change them more frequently.

Nope. You don't get it. I have no "wounds"--in fact, my neighborhood stayed put. My point was about Chantilly kids moving to Oakton. You know--from a lower SES school to a "better" one. My kids had friends that were moved. PP had claims that Langley parents are upset about moving to Herndon. My point is that it likely has nothing to do with Herndon and everything to do with wanting to stay put. But, you keep blaming everything on racism. I get it. And, FWIW, my neighborhood was successful in staying put. We weren't moved, so I have no "wounds" as you claim.

No one has yet explained what Herndon is going to do with extra kids.

This, exactly. It’s a fever dream for some of these “progressives”. They desperately want to socially engineer the Langley/Herndon boundary, no matter that it makes zero sense. Now, if Herndon was under enrolled and Langley was over enrolled , then yes - moving kids from Langley to Herndon would make perfect sense. But that’s exactly the opposite situation.

Such a straw-man argument. No one plans to move any Langley kids to Herndon now.

If there were a new high school in a decade in western Fairfax, of course all the boundaries there might change. At that point it would be stupid to keep busing kids 12 miles to Langley, if there were closer options.

Grow up. We are tired of your whining and stupid You Tube videos.

How about YOU grow up? The only reason people have been talking about this is because the SB was caught on video discussing this potential option. Now that it’s gotten out, they have realized what an absurd idea it was. It wouldn’t have been publicized had some astute parents not caught on and exposed the SB. I’m grateful that they did.

So you admit this “potential option” only really came up in the context of what may happen if another high school gets built in western Fairfax in a decade or so? Maybe in 2023 the uptight Great Falls parents will be able to find a more timely concern to obsess about.

One more day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The South Lakes redistricting was 12 years ago. Try to move on like others have. Not every decision will make everyone happy.

You didn't get the point. The point was that families don't want boundary changes even when it is to a "better" school like Oakton. And, there are good reasons.

I understood your point. It doesn’t have the same impact when it was 12 years ago and most of the affected neighborhoods are now happily at South Lakes. Nor does it have much relevance to the Dranesville race, when only two of the current SB members were on the Board and neither is seeking re-election.

But, please, keep nursing your ancient wounds and ignoring the real lesson from the South Lakes situation, which is that change is hard but sometimes necessary. If you can’t come to terms with that, maybe you can move to Falls Church City. Arlington and Montgomery change boundaries as often as Fairfax, and Loudoun and Prince William change them more frequently.

Nope. You don't get it. I have no "wounds"--in fact, my neighborhood stayed put. My point was about Chantilly kids moving to Oakton. You know--from a lower SES school to a "better" one. My kids had friends that were moved. PP had claims that Langley parents are upset about moving to Herndon. My point is that it likely has nothing to do with Herndon and everything to do with wanting to stay put. But, you keep blaming everything on racism. I get it. And, FWIW, my neighborhood was successful in staying put. We weren't moved, so I have no "wounds" as you claim.

No one has yet explained what Herndon is going to do with extra kids.

This, exactly. It’s a fever dream for some of these “progressives”. They desperately want to socially engineer the Langley/Herndon boundary, no matter that it makes zero sense. Now, if Herndon was under enrolled and Langley was over enrolled , then yes - moving kids from Langley to Herndon would make perfect sense. But that’s exactly the opposite situation.

Such a straw-man argument. No one plans to move any Langley kids to Herndon now.

If there were a new high school in a decade in western Fairfax, of course all the boundaries there might change. At that point it would be stupid to keep busing kids 12 miles to Langley, if there were closer options.

Grow up. We are tired of your whining and stupid You Tube videos.

How about YOU grow up? The only reason people have been talking about this is because the SB was caught on video discussing this potential option. Now that it’s gotten out, they have realized what an absurd idea it was. It wouldn’t have been publicized had some astute parents not caught on and exposed the SB. I’m grateful that they did.

Anonymous wrote:One more day!

Did you guys hear that the board's lawyer had to tell them they can't arrange schools by race?

They probably cried.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's going around like wildfire that Elaine knew all about this and never said anything about it.

It's fine if she really believed in moving kids around for "equity", but that contradicts what she's been saying.

Explains why she looks so miserable all the time.

She lights up when she talks about the environment and her work in that area.

Maybe she'll be able to go back to that soon.

One more day!

Did you guys hear that the board's lawyer had to tell them they can't arrange schools by race?

There was nothing in the draft policy that indicated that the consideration of SES should take priority over the other four considerations and, more importantly, those considerations would only come into play after there had been a threshold determination that there was a need for a boundary adjustment based on specified criteria, including having an overcrowded or under-enrolled school, or opening a new school.

Clearly they could have moved sooner to balance the enrollments at Langley and McLean, and for sure some of the delay related to the consideration of revisions to P8130.7, but also keep in mind:

- Langley’s renovations weren’t finished until August 2018;
- McLean’s enrollment, while growing, didn’t really spike until the fall of 2018;
- Strauss, knowing boundary changes are always controversial, probably thought at first she could pass the matter off to her successor;
- Other School Board members wanted other boundary changes in the pipeline to get attention first;
- Brabrand has halted smaller “administrative” changes because he saw abuses and a lack of transparency; and
- Strauss didn’t do enough leg work in January 2019 to explain the basis for her proposal the first time she tried to get a Langley/McLean boundary study included among the priority boundary adjustments in the current CIP.

Lots of areas where there is room for improvement, but most of it has relatively little to do with One Fairfax.