Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moon mentioned the boundary study in his email tonight and it sounds like he’s very enthusiastic about how things have been going.

“I'm in favor of this policy because I believe in supporting families with transparency and compassion during times of change.” — re: recent grandfathering changes.

In regards to the broader review, he says he’s heard concerns but blah blah blah: “Boundary changes can bring real uncertainty for families. I’ve heard from many parents and community members who worry about how changes might disrupt their child’s friendships, learning environment, or sense of stability. These concerns are deeply valid. That’s why this revised policy is so meaningful.”

Braddock families, please keep this in mind re:
Board of Supervisors race.

While I appreciate this revised policy on phasing, I hope that they aren’t thinking that the issue is solved and stops here. Many neighborhoods are still feeling uneasy and stressed about the unknowns future of their kids’ schooling. They’re now faced with having siblings split amongst highschools.

Moon has been consistent in saying there needs to be very clear and objective criteria to trigger a boundary change and then advocating for generous grandfathering. Contrast that with Rachna Sizemore-Heizer, who wanted to give the School Board maximum flexibility to change boundaries and decide whether to grandfather.

Until he comes out against boundary changes, I’ll continue to work to make sure he doesn’t get the seat. Same with rachna

Um, OK. Does your “work” consist of anything besides posting on DCUM and maybe FB and/or Next Door?

Of course, silly goose. Though I’m not on Nextdoor. You know they have a worthy opponent now, right? Chickens coming home to roost on the boundary study.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moon mentioned the boundary study in his email tonight and it sounds like he’s very enthusiastic about how things have been going.

“I'm in favor of this policy because I believe in supporting families with transparency and compassion during times of change.” — re: recent grandfathering changes.

In regards to the broader review, he says he’s heard concerns but blah blah blah: “Boundary changes can bring real uncertainty for families. I’ve heard from many parents and community members who worry about how changes might disrupt their child’s friendships, learning environment, or sense of stability. These concerns are deeply valid. That’s why this revised policy is so meaningful.”

Braddock families, please keep this in mind re:
Board of Supervisors race.

While I appreciate this revised policy on phasing, I hope that they aren’t thinking that the issue is solved and stops here. Many neighborhoods are still feeling uneasy and stressed about the unknowns future of their kids’ schooling. They’re now faced with having siblings split amongst highschools.

Moon has been consistent in saying there needs to be very clear and objective criteria to trigger a boundary change and then advocating for generous grandfathering. Contrast that with Rachna Sizemore-Heizer, who wanted to give the School Board maximum flexibility to change boundaries and decide whether to grandfather.

Until he comes out against boundary changes, I’ll continue to work to make sure he doesn’t get the seat. Same with rachna

Um, OK. Does your “work” consist of anything besides posting on DCUM and maybe FB and/or Next Door?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moon mentioned the boundary study in his email tonight and it sounds like he’s very enthusiastic about how things have been going.

“I'm in favor of this policy because I believe in supporting families with transparency and compassion during times of change.” — re: recent grandfathering changes.

In regards to the broader review, he says he’s heard concerns but blah blah blah: “Boundary changes can bring real uncertainty for families. I’ve heard from many parents and community members who worry about how changes might disrupt their child’s friendships, learning environment, or sense of stability. These concerns are deeply valid. That’s why this revised policy is so meaningful.”

Braddock families, please keep this in mind re:
Board of Supervisors race.

While I appreciate this revised policy on phasing, I hope that they aren’t thinking that the issue is solved and stops here. Many neighborhoods are still feeling uneasy and stressed about the unknowns future of their kids’ schooling. They’re now faced with having siblings split amongst highschools.

Moon has been consistent in saying there needs to be very clear and objective criteria to trigger a boundary change and then advocating for generous grandfathering. Contrast that with Rachna Sizemore-Heizer, who wanted to give the School Board maximum flexibility to change boundaries and decide whether to grandfather.

Until he comes out against boundary changes, I’ll continue to work to make sure he doesn’t get the seat. Same with rachna

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moon mentioned the boundary study in his email tonight and it sounds like he’s very enthusiastic about how things have been going.

“I'm in favor of this policy because I believe in supporting families with transparency and compassion during times of change.” — re: recent grandfathering changes.

In regards to the broader review, he says he’s heard concerns but blah blah blah: “Boundary changes can bring real uncertainty for families. I’ve heard from many parents and community members who worry about how changes might disrupt their child’s friendships, learning environment, or sense of stability. These concerns are deeply valid. That’s why this revised policy is so meaningful.”

Braddock families, please keep this in mind re:
Board of Supervisors race.

While I appreciate this revised policy on phasing, I hope that they aren’t thinking that the issue is solved and stops here. Many neighborhoods are still feeling uneasy and stressed about the unknowns future of their kids’ schooling. They’re now faced with having siblings split amongst highschools.

Moon has been consistent in saying there needs to be very clear and objective criteria to trigger a boundary change and then advocating for generous grandfathering. Contrast that with Rachna Sizemore-Heizer, who wanted to give the School Board maximum flexibility to change boundaries and decide whether to grandfather.

Anonymous wrote:Moon mentioned the boundary study in his email tonight and it sounds like he’s very enthusiastic about how things have been going.

“I'm in favor of this policy because I believe in supporting families with transparency and compassion during times of change.” — re: recent grandfathering changes.

In regards to the broader review, he says he’s heard concerns but blah blah blah: “Boundary changes can bring real uncertainty for families. I’ve heard from many parents and community members who worry about how changes might disrupt their child’s friendships, learning environment, or sense of stability. These concerns are deeply valid. That’s why this revised policy is so meaningful.”

Braddock families, please keep this in mind re:
Board of Supervisors race.

While I appreciate this revised policy on phasing, I hope that they aren’t thinking that the issue is solved and stops here. Many neighborhoods are still feeling uneasy and stressed about the unknowns future of their kids’ schooling. They’re now faced with having siblings split amongst highschools.

Moon mentioned the boundary study in his email tonight and it sounds like he’s very enthusiastic about how things have been going.

“I'm in favor of this policy because I believe in supporting families with transparency and compassion during times of change.” — re: recent grandfathering changes.

In regards to the broader review, he says he’s heard concerns but blah blah blah: “Boundary changes can bring real uncertainty for families. I’ve heard from many parents and community members who worry about how changes might disrupt their child’s friendships, learning environment, or sense of stability. These concerns are deeply valid. That’s why this revised policy is so meaningful.”

Braddock families, please keep this in mind re:
Board of Supervisors race.

Do we know the agenda for the August 5 BRAC meeting yet?

McLean has been overcrowded. They haven’t lobbied for anyone to be moved into their school against their will. That’s all FCPS’s doing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

People don't want to be moved to worst schools , no one wants to go from McLean to Marshall, Marshall to Falls Church , however the opposite is fine. You would rather be at McLean than Marshall, Marshall rather than Falls Church

The opposite is NOT fine. The are plenty of us that do NOT want to go from Marshall to McLean! I am so tired of the narrative that McLean is some Mecca that everyone wants to be part of.

Exactly. People want to stay at the pyramid that their families chose when they decided to buy in Fairfax County.