Anonymous wrote:I'm pro swap. But I agree the SB is a bunch of cowards hiding behind Murphy. The truth is, they've already approved the swap. So I don't know why they don't just have the public vote. Murphy is just giving them cover b/c they don't want to be accountable.He wouldn't be doing it over their actual public objection. I say, be accountable. Most of Arlington will be with you. You won't lose your seat over it.

You may have been right six months ago. If this had just flown under the radar, no one else in Arlington would give two figs about the infighting at ASFS and that Key had to move a mile down the road. But Murphy's *decision*-- which completely contradicted everything APS was telling the public over the summer-- sent a clear message that no one can rely on or expect true transparency from APS. APS and the SB have their agenda already and are just playing a game with everyone to make it seem like there is a fair and open process, when there isn't. And by immediately promising ASFS that their lab would be moved (without any analysis on costs, etc.) signaled that APS obviously hold some communities in higher esteem then others. I think that will get a lot of Arlingtonians pretty riled up on election day. Maybe not this election but in two years when APS puts a bond on the ballot to pay for overrun moving costs, that will probably piss a lot of people off-- especially those in SA who can't get basic or necessary learning services because of the budget shortfall.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kill the swap. It accomplishes nothing.

But, it does. It puts seats in Rosalyn with a large and walkable population.

DP. That is correct. I am extremely pro-swap.

Or, have two neighborhood schools which puts seats near Rosslyn with a large and walkable population and keeps the lab intact. APS actually suggested that back at the end of April when it published its second analysis. It's completely shortsighted of APS to have only one neighborhood school in that area. It's also shortsighted for anyone to realistically think that APS is going to spend the funds needed to properly move and recreate that lab. The lab is just collateral damage in this process, which is a real shame given the time, energy and money that obviously went into it-- whether you like it or not, or think it's not that big of a deal, real money went into it. If someone spent $200K to remodel their kitchen just to gut it 4 years later, would you think that was a good use of money?

Totally agree. Make them both neighborhood. Put immersion at ATS. Middle of the county. Close to native speakers who may or may not want to attend.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kill the swap. It accomplishes nothing.

But, it does. It puts seats in Rosalyn with a large and walkable population.

DP. That is correct. I am extremely pro-swap.

Or, have two neighborhood schools which puts seats near Rosslyn with a large and walkable population and keeps the lab intact. APS actually suggested that back at the end of April when it published its second analysis. It's completely shortsighted of APS to have only one neighborhood school in that area. It's also shortsighted for anyone to realistically think that APS is going to spend the funds needed to properly move and recreate that lab. The lab is just collateral damage in this process, which is a real shame given the time, energy and money that obviously went into it-- whether you like it or not, or think it's not that big of a deal, real money went into it. If someone spent $200K to remodel their kitchen just to gut it 4 years later, would you think that was a good use of money?

Anonymous wrote:Well, you couldn't relocate the option programs without knowing where you needed the seats and where you can spare them. And trying to figure that out 4 years ahead was a stupid idea. I stand by that.

And so now they will make change as slowly and incrementally as possible, which in this case means the swap without a broader review of sites.

Well, you couldn't relocate the option programs without knowing where you needed the seats and where you can spare them. And trying to figure that out 4 years ahead was a stupid idea. I stand by that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm pro swap. But I agree the SB is a bunch of cowards hiding behind Murphy. The truth is, they've already approved the swap. So I don't know why they don't just have the public vote. Murphy is just giving them cover b/c they don't want to be accountable.He wouldn't be doing it over their actual public objection. I say, be accountable. Most of Arlington will be with you. You won't lose your seat over it.

It’s the consequence of how poorly the community behaved last spring (which isn’t just on one school or one region). People made ugly accusations all over the place, whether on Internet forums, in emails to the staff/SB, or at SB meetings. People made up complete lies and spread them around to derail the process. People screamed at the staff during community meetings. The staff and SB haven’t forgotten it, and the consequence is that they’re not opening up as much community engagement as they used to. Look at the SA boundary process, where they only put forth a single proposal for feedback rather than multiple scenarios people could could debate. For the swap, it will be limited feedback only on timing. Other boundaries aren’t being done until 2020 because too many people affected creates too much controversy to sift through, and they don’t want to be fighting the same fights for three straight years if they make decisions now that wouldn’t be implemented until 2021. We did this to ourselves, and we have no one else to blame.

If they don’t want community feedback, they shouldn’t be on the school board. Period. Participation should not be punished by depriving Arlington residents of the opportunity to participate in the boundary process. The need for a complaint with the VA department of education is just screaming out with every attempted justification for the shameless disenfranchisement of anyone not rich enough to underwrite their own educational facilities.

Anonymous wrote:Well. It was sort of a stupid idea to start doing boundaries for 2021 last year. That's part of the reason staff stopped it. And part of what the drama was about. People didn't want another situation with McKinley where the numbers were wrong.

They weren’t doing boundaries last spring. They were trying to determine the best locations for options programs, which, if they were going to be moved, should have been done before any boundary decisions were made. So now we’re in a situation where it all has to be done piecemeal, and it’s why we’re going to get they Key/ASFS swap rather than a comprehensive review of option locations.

Well. It was sort of a stupid idea to start doing boundaries for 2021 last year. That's part of the reason staff stopped it. And part of what the drama was about. People didn't want another situation with McKinley where the numbers were wrong.

Anonymous wrote:I'm pro swap. But I agree the SB is a bunch of cowards hiding behind Murphy. The truth is, they've already approved the swap. So I don't know why they don't just have the public vote. Murphy is just giving them cover b/c they don't want to be accountable.He wouldn't be doing it over their actual public objection. I say, be accountable. Most of Arlington will be with you. You won't lose your seat over it.

It’s the consequence of how poorly the community behaved last spring (which isn’t just on one school or one region). People made ugly accusations all over the place, whether on Internet forums, in emails to the staff/SB, or at SB meetings. People made up complete lies and spread them around to derail the process. People screamed at the staff during community meetings. The staff and SB haven’t forgotten it, and the consequence is that they’re not opening up as much community engagement as they used to. Look at the SA boundary process, where they only put forth a single proposal for feedback rather than multiple scenarios people could could debate. For the swap, it will be limited feedback only on timing. Other boundaries aren’t being done until 2020 because too many people affected creates too much controversy to sift through, and they don’t want to be fighting the same fights for three straight years if they make decisions now that wouldn’t be implemented until 2021. We did this to ourselves, and we have no one else to blame.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the most problematic aspects of accomplishing the swap via administrative declaration is the complete lack of confidence many Arlington residents have in the fairness and propriety of the action. There is virtually no precedent for something like this in APS, and you couple that with the fact that the primary beneficiary of the swap is a segment of one of the wealthiest neighborhoids in APS, and why shouldn’t we assume something untoward is happening? Just fold it back into the boundary process like every other school assignment decision in the county. Is it so hard to at least pretend to apply the same set of rules to everyone?

Yeah, I’m sure you all would be totally chill about the swap if only it were being put to a board vote instead of it being Murphy’s decision.

So we should forego process if somebody disagrees with us? Got it.

No, but let’s not pretend that everyone would be calmer and more accepting of the decision if the board were voting on it. People would be screaming all the same accusations, they’d just be aiming them at the SB instead of Murphy.

The thing about process is that everyone has to suck up the results. If you bypass process people gripe about the outcome forever. Just do it right so there’s no room to complain that there was favoritism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the most problematic aspects of accomplishing the swap via administrative declaration is the complete lack of confidence many Arlington residents have in the fairness and propriety of the action. There is virtually no precedent for something like this in APS, and you couple that with the fact that the primary beneficiary of the swap is a segment of one of the wealthiest neighborhoids in APS, and why shouldn’t we assume something untoward is happening? Just fold it back into the boundary process like every other school assignment decision in the county. Is it so hard to at least pretend to apply the same set of rules to everyone?

Yeah, I’m sure you all would be totally chill about the swap if only it were being put to a board vote instead of it being Murphy’s decision.

So we should forego process if somebody disagrees with us? Got it.

No, but let’s not pretend that everyone would be calmer and more accepting of the decision if the board were voting on it. People would be screaming all the same accusations, they’d just be aiming them at the SB instead of Murphy.

I'm pro swap. But I agree the SB is a bunch of cowards hiding behind Murphy. The truth is, they've already approved the swap. So I don't know why they don't just have the public vote. Murphy is just giving them cover b/c they don't want to be accountable.He wouldn't be doing it over their actual public objection. I say, be accountable. Most of Arlington will be with you. You won't lose your seat over it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kill the swap. It accomplishes nothing.

But, it does. It puts seats in Rosalyn with a large and walkable population.

Rosslyn is not walkable to the Key location.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the most problematic aspects of accomplishing the swap via administrative declaration is the complete lack of confidence many Arlington residents have in the fairness and propriety of the action. There is virtually no precedent for something like this in APS, and you couple that with the fact that the primary beneficiary of the swap is a segment of one of the wealthiest neighborhoids in APS, and why shouldn’t we assume something untoward is happening? Just fold it back into the boundary process like every other school assignment decision in the county. Is it so hard to at least pretend to apply the same set of rules to everyone?

Yeah, I’m sure you all would be totally chill about the swap if only it were being put to a board vote instead of it being Murphy’s decision.

So we should forego process if somebody disagrees with us? Got it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the most problematic aspects of accomplishing the swap via administrative declaration is the complete lack of confidence many Arlington residents have in the fairness and propriety of the action. There is virtually no precedent for something like this in APS, and you couple that with the fact that the primary beneficiary of the swap is a segment of one of the wealthiest neighborhoids in APS, and why shouldn’t we assume something untoward is happening? Just fold it back into the boundary process like every other school assignment decision in the county. Is it so hard to at least pretend to apply the same set of rules to everyone?

Yeah, I’m sure you all would be totally chill about the swap if only it were being put to a board vote instead of it being Murphy’s decision.

APS has a well deserved reputation of F-ing things up left and right. They can’t get numbers right. They ignore all signs of change. Took forever to realize years of student population growth weren’t an anomaly. Parents have their issues. Can be overly emotional about change. But what they have also done is pointed out issues and shortcomings when APS either can’t or won’t.

So, no. We wouldn’t be chill. But at least we’d know they were aware of things they otherwise were too dumb to see or chose to blindly ignore.