THAT'S BECAUSE "MINORITIES" ARE THE BIGGEST RACISTS THAT EVER WERE !

The minorities are the majority at GBW. Nothing wrong with that.

The PTA budget says you are the minority. You get what you pay for. How much do you give to your child's school? Is everything in English? Do you demand the PTA translate to Spanish?

to Oak View parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank you for the information. A few more
> questions for you.
>
> 1. How large are the class sizes?
>
> 2. Does the school have after school clubs?
>
> 3. Is the PTA involved in the school?
>
> 4. I have read that Oak View has about 700 kids.
> Would another 100 kids added to the school make
> the over school over-crowded?
>
> Thank you for taking the time to look at my
> questions.
>
> From a Clifton parent.

What will you do if you don't like the answers to these questions?

To: Question to Clifton parent

Why would you assume they are going to "do" anything. Maybe they just want to be informed. Since when do parents NOT have the right to ask questions about the school that their children will attend?

From Another Thread has identified the core issue that would create a level playing field...FCPS has a staff of lawyers on retainer that want nothing more than to shut down parents and students. Why should they have such a large budget and large overage? Why is this allowed when funds are short? Because they are constantly doing what they are doing now with Clifton (and dont think for a minute that they wont do it with you whoever you are, they even eat their young, their own kids...), they make their decisions behind closed doors, in secret-God knows what the real agenda is-you can be sure it is either power or money (and you can be sure it has nothing to do with quality of education or the consumers of this product-HA! the students...), they create a faux process (usually so full of bureaucratic hyperbole that no one can sort it out or refute it), then they do what they want. I cannot overstate how dangerous this is to a system, a community and individual students. It tears apart neighborhoods, families, and creates mental illnesses...

The PTA resolution. Did you notice less than 24 hours to respond. Required your name. When results were released they did not say how many people voted. Why do the schools allow this?

It is probably just a distraction to take away from Clifton shutting down.

PTANot Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The PTA resolution. Did you notice less than 24
> hours to respond. Required your name. When
> results were released they did not say how many
> people voted. Why do the schools allow this?



Where can I find the results?

Question to Clifton parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> to Oak View parent Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Thank you for the information. A few more
> > questions for you.
> >
> > 1. How large are the class sizes?
> >
> > 2. Does the school have after school clubs?
> >
> > 3. Is the PTA involved in the school?
> >
> > 4. I have read that Oak View has about 700
> kids.
> > Would another 100 kids added to the school make
> > the over school over-crowded?
> >
> > Thank you for taking the time to look at my
> > questions.
> >
> > From a Clifton parent.
>
> What will you do if you don't like the answers to
> these questions?

I think the Clifton families will be quite happy with Oak View and this individual is just trying to get a feel for the Oak View community as it had not been noted in prior options as being a school that would receive Clifton students. The tone in their message was polite and simply appears to be seeking some basic information.

Just one other item. Did anyone else catch during the School Board meeting last night what Liz Bradsher said in response to a question about why Sangster would not be receiving students from Clifton when that had been proposed in all 4 of the prior options? She said that after speaking with the principal at Sangster she (being Liz) now understood better the programs at Sangster and that bringing students from Clifton into Sangster could disrupt the community learning environment for some of the special programs at Sangster. REALLY?

It doesn't take much looking around the FCPS Web site to see that Sangster's very own appointee to the Southwestern Regional Planning Committee indicated Sangster had "plenty of room and would welcome the addition of Clifton students." That same individual pushed extremely hard for the closing of Clifton. What changed and why does that individual appear now to be so disconnected from his own school community and the will of the principal? When FCPS (and Liz in particular) talks about an open and transparent process, behavior like what was shown by Bob Larson in the ad-hoc committee doesn't jive with the principal's comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year later. Oh, and nevermind that Sangster will be at a 90% capacity or thereabouts after all the deck chairs are shuffled.

Anyone else realize this is going on? This is yet another one of those things that smells rotten....

Yes PTA presidents. Be open. Share the numbers either here or on your PTA website. We wantto know real results of surveys for resolution. FOIA would also list names.

Justataxpayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just one other item. Did anyone else catch during
> the School Board meeting last night what Liz
> Bradsher said in response to a question about why
> Sangster would not be receiving students from
> Clifton when that had been proposed in all 4 of
> the prior options? She said that after speaking
> with the principal at Sangster she (being Liz) now
> understood better the programs at Sangster and
> that bringing students from Clifton into Sangster
> could disrupt the community learning environment
> for some of the special programs at Sangster.
> REALLY?
>
> It doesn't take much looking around the FCPS Web
> site to see that Sangster's very own appointee to
> the Southwestern Regional Planning Committee
> indicated Sangster had "plenty of room and would
> welcome the addition of Clifton students." That
> same individual pushed extremely hard for the
> closing of Clifton. What changed and why does
> that individual appear now to be so disconnected
> from his own school community and the will of the
> principal? When FCPS (and Liz in particular)
> talks about an open and transparent process,
> behavior like what was shown by Bob Larson in the
> ad-hoc committee doesn't jive with the principal's
> comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year
> later. Oh, and nevermind that Sangster will be at
> a 90% capacity or thereabouts after all the deck
> chairs are shuffled.
>
> Anyone else realize this is going on? This is yet
> another one of those things that smells rotten....


Please inform us of the Sangsters "principal's comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year later." What was said?

Justataxpayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just one other item. Did anyone else catch during
> the School Board meeting last night what Liz
> Bradsher said in response to a question about why
> Sangster would not be receiving students from
> Clifton when that had been proposed in all 4 of
> the prior options? She said that after speaking
> with the principal at Sangster she (being Liz) now
> understood better the programs at Sangster and
> that bringing students from Clifton into Sangster
> could disrupt the community learning environment
> for some of the special programs at Sangster.
> REALLY?
>
> It doesn't take much looking around the FCPS Web
> site to see that Sangster's very own appointee to
> the Southwestern Regional Planning Committee
> indicated Sangster had "plenty of room and would
> welcome the addition of Clifton students." That
> same individual pushed extremely hard for the
> closing of Clifton. What changed and why does
> that individual appear now to be so disconnected
> from his own school community and the will of the
> principal? When FCPS (and Liz in particular)
> talks about an open and transparent process,
> behavior like what was shown by Bob Larson in the
> ad-hoc committee doesn't jive with the principal's
> comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year
> later. Oh, and nevermind that Sangster will be at
> a 90% capacity or thereabouts after all the deck
> chairs are shuffled.
>
> Anyone else realize this is going on? This is yet
> another one of those things that smells rotten....

YES, it smells rotten. That's what I've been saying. I don't understand the principal's statement...if she even said it. Is there proof? You know you can't believe a word our SB rep. says. Sangster has an Autism Center and an AAP center. It's a great school with very involved parents. It's beyond reason that adding some students from a NEARBY community could "disrupt the learning enviorment." Students come and go all the time. I think they just like not having crowded classrooms.Interesting that a memo came home urging parents to support all day kindergarten for Sangster. Pretty outrageous since the schools receiving Clifton students will have priority for ADK. Our very own SELF appointed rep to the Southwestern Regional Planning Committee is a friend of our school board rep. Connect the dots.

Sangster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Justataxpayer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Just one other item. Did anyone else catch
> during
> > the School Board meeting last night what Liz
> > Bradsher said in response to a question about
> why
> > Sangster would not be receiving students from
> > Clifton when that had been proposed in all 4 of
> > the prior options? She said that after
> speaking
> > with the principal at Sangster she (being Liz)
> now
> > understood better the programs at Sangster and
> > that bringing students from Clifton into
> Sangster
> > could disrupt the community learning
> environment
> > for some of the special programs at Sangster.
> > REALLY?
> >
> > It doesn't take much looking around the FCPS
> Web
> > site to see that Sangster's very own appointee
> to
> > the Southwestern Regional Planning Committee
> > indicated Sangster had "plenty of room and
> would
> > welcome the addition of Clifton students."
> That
> > same individual pushed extremely hard for the
> > closing of Clifton. What changed and why does
> > that individual appear now to be so
> disconnected
> > from his own school community and the will of
> the
> > principal? When FCPS (and Liz in particular)
> > talks about an open and transparent process,
> > behavior like what was shown by Bob Larson in
> the
> > ad-hoc committee doesn't jive with the
> principal's
> > comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year
> > later. Oh, and nevermind that Sangster will be
> at
> > a 90% capacity or thereabouts after all the
> deck
> > chairs are shuffled.
> >
> > Anyone else realize this is going on? This is
> yet
> > another one of those things that smells
> rotten....
>
> YES, it smells rotten. That's what I've been
> saying. I don't understand the principal's
> statement...if she even said it. Is there proof?
> You know you can't believe a word our SB rep.
> says. Sangster has an Autism Center and an AAP
> center. It's a great school with very involved
> parents. It's beyond reason that adding some
> students from a NEARBY community could "disrupt
> the learning enviorment." Students come and go all
> the time. I think they just like not having
> crowded classrooms.Interesting that a memo came
> home urging parents to support all day
> kindergarten for Sangster. Pretty outrageous
> since the schools receiving Clifton students will
> have priority for ADK. Our very own SELF appointed
> rep to the Southwestern Regional Planning
> Committee is a friend of our school board rep.
> Connect the dots.

Clifton students can't be part of the "Sangster community?" That very argument defies the definition of community. Sangster draws students from all over the SW County for their special programs. Our busses pass right by the Clifton community. For that very reason Sangster is on the third bell because kids come from all over. So WHY THEN can't Clifton kids be part of this community. He lobbied so hard to close another community school, now they can't be part of our community? The arrogance is astounding.

"The arrogance is astounding."

Tell me about it. Amazing....scratching each other's backs--the PTAs and the SB involving in this elementary school redistricting. Nothing is transparent these days when it comes to redistricting and the SB.

Justataxpayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just one other item. Did anyone else catch during
> the School Board meeting last night what Liz
> Bradsher said in response to a question about why
> Sangster would not be receiving students from
> Clifton when that had been proposed in all 4 of
> the prior options? She said that after speaking
> with the principal at Sangster she (being Liz) now
> understood better the programs at Sangster and
> that bringing students from Clifton into Sangster
> could disrupt the community learning environment
> for some of the special programs at Sangster.
> REALLY?
>
> It doesn't take much looking around the FCPS Web
> site to see that Sangster's very own appointee to
> the Southwestern Regional Planning Committee
> indicated Sangster had "plenty of room and would
> welcome the addition of Clifton students." That
> same individual pushed extremely hard for the
> closing of Clifton. What changed and why does
> that individual appear now to be so disconnected
> from his own school community and the will of the
> principal? When FCPS (and Liz in particular)
> talks about an open and transparent process,
> behavior like what was shown by Bob Larson in the
> ad-hoc committee doesn't jive with the principal's
> comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year
> later. Oh, and nevermind that Sangster will be at
> a 90% capacity or thereabouts after all the deck
> chairs are shuffled.
>
> Anyone else realize this is going on? This is yet
> another one of those things that smells rotten....


Just curious. If, based on the census, they can carve another area out for a new County Supervisor seat, does Sangster fall in that area? Would Liz Bradsher be eligible to run for that new County Supervisor seat? Is that why she hasn't yet announced what her intentions are for what seat she is going to run for in November? Don't know enough about what is going on with the status of that but from the FOIA emails it looks like some of her decisions are selfishly motivated to her own self political interests. Just curious if there might possibly be any connections between that possible new seat and Liz and Sangster.

> Just curious. If, based on the census, they can
> carve another area out for a new County Supervisor
> seat, does Sangster fall in that area? Would Liz
> Bradsher be eligible to run for that new County
> Supervisor seat? Is that why she hasn't yet
> announced what her intentions are for what seat
> she is going to run for in November? Don't know
> enough about what is going on with the status of
> that but from the FOIA emails it looks like some
> of her decisions are selfishly motivated to her
> own self political interests. Just curious if
> there might possibly be any connections between
> that possible new seat and Liz and Sangster.


That would be obscenely evil if she was throwing all the children in these schools involved in this boundary study to the wind just because she was trying to get votes to win some new seat in another area! If that happens, than I wish someone from the Clifton community would run for School Board because there would be nobody more motivated than someone from Clifton to fix this nightmare she is getting ready to put all of the kids in this portion of the County through.

tell us Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Justataxpayer Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> She said that after
> speaking
> > with the principal at Sangster she (being Liz)
> now
> > understood better the programs at Sangster and
> > that bringing students from Clifton into
> Sangster
> > could disrupt the community learning
> environment
> > for some of the special programs at Sangster.
> > REALLY?
> >
> > When FCPS (and Liz in particular)
> > talks about an open and transparent process,
> > behavior like what was shown by Bob Larson in
> the
> > ad-hoc committee doesn't jive with the
> principal's
> > comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year
> > later.
>
>
> Please inform us of the Sangsters "principal's
> comments made to Liz Bradsher less than a year
> later." What was said?

The video has not been posted yet of this past Thursday's School Board meeting. But, during the meeting Liz Bradsher volunteered an explanation as to why Sangster was no longer to receive Clifton students. In her explanation she said that after a discussion with the Sangster principal she now understands the special programs that are housed at Sangster and that adding to the student population at Sangster would impact the learning environment of the school.

Facts from FCPS.edu show that Sangster's enrollment is projected to decline through 2015 from 859 students now down to 802 students. The school has a program capacity of 885 yet now there apparently is no room by 2015 for Clifton students yet through all of the Southwestern Committee meetings there was a TON of space available for students from Clifton. It just doesn't seem like everyone is being treated the same here. Sangster doesn't want more students so they don't get them. A subdivision just off 123 south of Fairview continues to go to Oak View while they actually drive past the entrance to Fairview to get to Oak View. The transparency of this process is showing that some communities are clearly receiving preferential treatment (though no one in the schools will own up to it).

Justataxpayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> The video has not been posted yet of this past
> Thursday's School Board meeting. But, during the
> meeting Liz Bradsher volunteered an explanation as
> to why Sangster was no longer to receive Clifton
> students. In her explanation she said that after
> a discussion with the Sangster principal she now
> understands the special programs that are housed
> at Sangster and that adding to the student
> population at Sangster would impact the learning
> environment of the school.
>
I don't see any reason at this point to believe a single word that comes out of Liz Bradsher's mouth, and this type of silly rationalization for special treatment gives me no basis to reconsider.

I live in Clifton and my kids are being moved to Oak View. I just read in the paper that PTA president said she felt sorry for the kids in Clifton because the school is so far away. This worries me too. How long will my kids be on the bus? The SB has not done a study on bus times. How can this be?

The Clifton kids being moved to Oak View won't have much longer a bus ride than some of the kids already at Oak View. Some of Clifton kids being moved to Fairview, however, will have a really long bus ride.

Have any of you thought of homeschool?

It's hard to home school when you have to go to work. Why should we home school when we pay taxes for schools? I would need a voucher to pay for the materials, etc.

Just take out the books from the library. Cost is free. Didnt know you worked.

why Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's hard to home school when you have to go to
> work. Why should we home school when we pay taxes
> for schools? I would need a voucher to pay for
> the materials, etc.


Right, while homeschooling is an option, with the cost of living given in Fairfax County, most of us definitely have to work!

Does anyone know when parents will be told by FCPS what school their child will attend next year?

The FCPS web site does not state the date.

Does anyone from the PTA know? Plus when we we get a bus schedule? Many parents work full time and need to make arrangements.

Thank you for the help.

Final SB vote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anyone know when parents will be told by FCPS
> what school their child will attend next year?
>
> The FCPS web site does not state the date.
>
> Does anyone from the PTA know? Plus when we we get
> a bus schedule? Many parents work full time and
> need to make arrangements.
>
> Thank you for the help.

Chill the hell out. You'll find out before school starts next fall. Stop pretending that you're so damn important that you require six months advance notice of everything.

Final SB vote Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Does anyone know when parents will be told by FCPS
> what school their child will attend next year?
>
> The FCPS web site does not state the date.
>
> Does anyone from the PTA know? Plus when we we get
> a bus schedule? Many parents work full time and
> need to make arrangements.
>
> Thank you for the help.

The school board vote for which option they are choosing is Feb. 24th so not until then. Currently there are 5 options - I imagine it is between option D or the staff recommendation option that is date 1/7/11. I doubt the bus schedule will come out until the week before school starts has it has in the past. I wonder if any schools will be changing start times in the morning due to further travel by some students - if so hopefully we will find out well in advance.

This does not effect highschool kids, so you are not impacted. If you are in 4 grade or below. Which would be 5 grade or below next year because 6 is grandfathered. If you are below then you should have your parents watching what you post or have your mom post for you her question.

?s Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Final SB vote Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Does anyone know when parents will be told by
> FCPS
> > what school their child will attend next year?
> >
> > The FCPS web site does not state the date.
> >
> > Does anyone from the PTA know? Plus when we we
> get
> > a bus schedule? Many parents work full time and
> > need to make arrangements.
> >
> > Thank you for the help.
>
> The school board vote for which option they are
> choosing is Feb. 24th so not until then.
> Currently there are 5 options - I imagine it is
> between option D or the staff recommendation
> option that is date 1/7/11. I doubt the bus
> schedule will come out until the week before
> school starts has it has in the past. I wonder if
> any schools will be changing start times in the
> morning due to further travel by some students -
> if so hopefully we will find out well in advance.


Option D is off the table even though it is predomiantely still shown on the web site to keep people quite and confused. If you read the board docs you will find that The staff Final Proposal is what is being voted on. Conveniently they have divided this final proposal into 2 parts. The one Appendix shows the map and HOAs being switched etc... the second doc shows things like oh the Greenbriar East kinders will still be transfered to West for 1 year and get 1/2 day kinder....It really looks like they are trying to hide what is going down to keep people thinking that something other than this final plan will happen. I have heard second hand from people that this is pretty much a done deal and that any resolution being passed by the PTA will not matter. At this point I imagine my kids will be changing schools and I will be voting for people other than the existing board members.

Stayingput why do you care about GB East kindergarten. It does not impact your kids going to Poplar Tree. That seems like just trying to start trouble. The PTA resolution was just starting trouble too. I will vote for the same school board person for my area that is getting moved. It is a great option. I hope the PTAs run for the school board. They represent all the parents and will be a 100% win. Now everyone get back to reality. Next time give more than 12-24 hours to comment and respond to the survey when they had it in their hands weeks ago. I am hoping this is all over and we move on. Fairax County is great school. One is better than the next.

East to West. West to Tree. All too confusing.

Keep fighting for what is right. The SB is made up of a those that run for the tea party movement. Liz Bradsher is just as bad as Sarah Palin.

I will always give money to what is right. It seems many in the FCPS want to not give anything. Now the other schools wish they had paid attention. The PTA members even admit as much.

Shame on parents who only care for themselves. You know have let the SB dig your grave. Just pick up your shovel and put some dirt over your school. That is what you wanted for Clifton.

comeonfolks Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Stayingput why do you care about GB East
> kindergarten. It does not impact your kids going
> to Poplar Tree. That seems like just trying to
> start trouble. The PTA resolution was just
> starting trouble too. I will vote for the same
> school board person for my area that is getting
> moved. It is a great option. I hope the PTAs run
> for the school board. They represent all the
> parents and will be a 100% win. Now everyone get
> back to reality. Next time give more than 12-24
> hours to comment and respond to the survey when
> they had it in their hands weeks ago. I am hoping
> this is all over and we move on. Fairax County is
> great school. One is better than the next.


It must be nice to live in your own little bubble and not give a damn about anyone else. Do you even listen to yourself?

Maybe Stayingput is concerned about Kindergarten in other schools because for many parents it is going to be a concern when you're child is moved from a school with Full Day K to a school with 1/2 day. Stayingput isn't starting trouble, simply pointing out an obvious concern for many.

Then you say that the PTA resolution was just to start trouble, but you wish that the PTAs would run for school board because they represent all the parents and it will be a win?!?!??? I'm sorry, I'm confused. The PTAs came up with the resolution, but what, this time they really don't represent the parents. Or is it that they aren't representing YOUR VIEW, so you don't like them for the moment. If you're happy with your move to a new school, good for you. But seriously, do you hate your current school that much that you don't give a damn about the rest of the kids involved in this study as long as you get what you want?

Sounds a bit selfish to me.

The kids learn the same thing with 1/2 day versus full day. Look at the ciriculum. FCPS should not offer a babysitter service for 1/2 day in this time of budget concerns. The schools with populations that need it, have it funded through the federal goverment. Would a solution be to have 1/2 day just next year and not the next? Where will this money come from? What about teach and government worker raises? That will definitely take away from that.

The comment about PTA running for school board was sarcasm. They have just as much of a shot of winning as does the current people.

The comment about my VIEW. Except for 12-24 hours to fill out a survey, which minimal response. Who on the PTA asked for my view. You cannt get our views unless you ask and not do it last minute? PTA meetings are held during the day. Most people work. We saw that in this discussion when a parent said they need to work and cannot homeschool.

I agree Clifton was a mess. A new school should have been built. I also think that people do not like change. The kids will still get the best education. If they are AAP they will be pulled to another school anyway.

I cant keep up with all the requests. Dont close Clifton, dont move my children, not that school it is too far, concerned about another school, etc. To be honest, if we are looking out for all the students, why didnt you push for full day kindergarten sooner? GBW does not offer it. I did not see you sticking up for that the past 5 years.

Clifton elementary never had all kindergarten and we just dealt with. We also went without SAC and we did not complain about that either. We pay higher taxes and we went without a lot of extras. We still are not asking for much. It is the SB who made this mess. Not Clifton elementary.

comeonefolks Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The kids learn the same thing with 1/2 day versus
> full day. Look at the ciriculum. FCPS should not
> offer a babysitter service for 1/2 day in this
> time of budget concerns. The schools with
> populations that need it, have it funded through
> the federal goverment. Would a solution be to
> have 1/2 day just next year and not the next?
> Where will this money come from? What about teach
> and government worker raises? That will
> definitely take away from that.


Actually it is not primarily funded through federal funds and over 70% of the county schools have it. Also the listed SOLS are the same (state SOLS by the way) but that does not mean it is an equal education or the end of year results in reading level and math skills are the same. This is not an issue of "child care" obviously you do not think much of teachers with that attitude. Clearly you have not taught this age group before or have any working knowledge of this matter since your facts are so wrong.
>

>
> The comment about my VIEW. Except for 12-24 hours
> to fill out a survey, which minimal response. Who
> on the PTA asked for my view. You cannt get our
> views unless you ask and not do it last minute?
> PTA meetings are held during the day.

Not all PTAs have their meetings during the day, and surveys were done at our school to determine the time when the turn out would be the highest. I have attend PTA meetings since my children began school and they used to be all at night and I was generally the only non committee non board person there after the first meeting, when our school switched to a mix time format alternating nights and days - it is the day time when we garner the largest group of parents, the meetings are held first thing when school starts and some working parents change their schedule to come then. Most working parents did not want evening meetings either because it was their family time.
.
>
> I cant keep up with all the requests. Dont close
> Clifton, dont move my children, not that school it
> is too far, concerned about another school, etc.
> To be honest, if we are looking out for all the
> students, why didnt you push for full day
> kindergarten sooner? GBW does not offer it. I
> did not see you sticking up for that the past 5
> years.


I have been involved with full day kindergarten long before I had children when I worked for the county and was on a committee to evaluate the need and worked with many of the parents at the first schools who had it. I am well aware GBW does not offer it and have addressed my issues with that to the board in the past. That said - how do you have any clue who I am or if I have been "sticking up for it in the last 5 years"

Regarding my concern for GBE and how they will be switched to GBW for half day. First that shift is part if the cause of my children's move and I think it is a bad plan. Second it has been proven full day kindergarten has an impact on a children's education, and schools should not be losing it. Do I think more schools should be getting - yes, but not at the expense of teacher raises (but then the lawyers the county holds on reatiner and the salaries of the individuals who can not seem to tabulate data for this study- should certainly help with raises) I think the GBE parents need to stand up for themselves in the regard that they will be losing full day kindergarten, some may be fine with it - they have a right to their opinion either way and should voice it, but also they have a right to that information being clearly presented and not tucked away.

WHAT I DON'T LIKE is that the school board has not been forthcoming with this information and other aspects to this final plan. The web site does not present this and other changes in the final plan outright where it can be clearly seen and have kept Option D listed seperate as if it is still an option, but when you read the final plan documents - both of them you find it to be an entirely different story. For all the concern about community involvement and listing everyones comments etc.. Now when we have the final plan that is to be voted on the way it is being presented can lead one to believe that there is some intention to cause confusion and reduce community input. Parents think they are getting one thing but it is entirely different.


As for me "just trying to start trouble" at least I am part of the process as are the PTAs. If you are happy with the plan that is great, please go to the school board and support it (I think they probably need a few pats on the back right now -they are far and few coming and in my mind not deserved.) Personally it does not sound like you are very involved and that you abhore the process or people questioning it because you are getting what you want. I may not get what I want - and if that is the case then I will continued to be involved at my new school in a positive manor (because parent involvement is key to a great school), but at least I can say I focused on the issues at hand and didn't just blindly let it go on and complain about it like many have done and gone no further.

If your kids go to any of the schools that are part of this redistricting and they rush this through and start this next Fall, you might as well forget about your child getting any education at all the first 6 months. It is going to be an administrative nightmare trying to just get the paperwork and data transferred to the appropriate schools for this many students in that short of a time period. Parents are going to be ripping kids out, pupil placing, probably trying to use different addresses, etc. With the number of kids they will be shifting around this area of Fairfax, you will be lucky if your school even knows your child belongs there! Forget about the teachers having any kind of time to prepare and review your child's file! Just write next year off as a waste of valuable time for your child.

Do any of FCPS figures include the cost to furnish and stock the trailers with all that is needed for an appropriate learning environment? The furniture at Clifton Elementary was designed for larger classrooms not trailers so it doesn't make sense to assume they would just move the furniture from Clifton to trailers. What about extra seating and supplies for cafeterias, libraries, gyms, etc. All those costs add up especially when you are talking about multiple trailers at multiple schools - where are those being reflected? In the rushed manner that FCPS is pushing this through, is any of this really being included in the total cost and provided to the public?

You made some great points. I never even considered what would happen when this mess starts and kids are flung about the county. It is going to be awful. Just the bus schedule alone scares me. I really dislike FCPS. I only wish we could afford to send our kids to private school.

Do we know if they will still bus? Looks like less busses with the new layout.

If we dont have busing when we change schools, Im not changing schools.

Of course there will be bussing to new schools. They will even bus 6th graders grandfathered in to their old school.

buses Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course there will be bussing to new schools.
> They will even bus 6th graders grandfathered in to
> their old school.


Unless, of course, it is a Clifton Elementary student. The School Board doesn't care about how those children are affected.

PTAs RESOLUTION FOR FCPS SCHOOL BOARD ACTION
ON SW REGION BOUNDARY STUDY

WHEREAS:
1. FCPS is using inconsistent enrollment projections and building capacity data when determining the number of students each of the impacted schools in the SW Region Boundary Study can accommodate and educate.

2. The proposed time frame put forth by FCPS staff for the boundary change implementation is moving too fast for public comfort and confidence.

3. The proposed time frame put forth by FCPS staff in OPTIONS A, B, C & updated D moves some children into schools before proposed new building additions are complete.

4. Bus transportation costs and accurate travel times considering traffic flows rather than solely distance, have not been publicly addressed for parents who have legitimate concerns about how long young children may have to travel to a new school.

5. FCPS has not fully addressed the legitimate concerns of working parents with children in SACC, such as how SACC placement will occur and how waitlists will be merged and managed.

6. FCPS has neither adequately addressed scheduling conflicts presented for families in schools with current full day kindergarten who may be moved to a new school with half-day kindergarten nor have they addressed the decrease in the quality of education that these students would receive as a result of such a move.

7. Schools to receive proposed classroom additions and schools that retain and/or add modular additions will not receive other capacity enhancements to fully meet the Educational Specifications.

8. The Options A, B, C and updated D presented by FCPS offer a short term band aid solution to the overcrowded elementary school population in the Southwestern portion of the county.

9. This is the largest boundary study ever undertaken by FCPS officials and many questions and concerns from parents and Fairfax County residents remain unanswered.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The PTAs who adopt this resolution are expressing a sufficient lack of confidence in the current SW Region Boundary Study process to date, the enrollment projections and capacity data presented by FCPS staff to date, and the rushed time table advocated by FCPS for the largest boundary study ever conducted in FCPS history.

2. The FCPS School Board should address the following concerns about the SW Region Boundary Study at the work session on February 14, 2011 and report back to the public and affected schools with answers to these concerns BEFORE conducting any vote(s) about school boundary changes in the SW Region:

a. Do not move any students in September 2011 when there are too many unanswered questions regarding capacity availability.
b. Do not move students into schools without existing capacity before permanent capacity, in the form of newly proposed building additions, is complete. Trailers and modulars are not permanent solutions.
c. Fully develop and distribute to the public, a transportation plan including costs and ride times before implementing any boundary changes.
d. Do not implement any boundary changes before fully reexamining construction of a new elementary school at or near the epicenter of overcrowding.
e. Use one consistent source for data when determining current capacity and projected enrollment based on credible and reliable population growth analysis.
f. Determine the exact plan for SACC placement when children with a SACC assignment at their current school are moved to another school.
g. Address concerns of impacted families who may be moved from a school with current full day kindergarten to a new school that has half-day kindergarten.

Oak View Elementary School PTA Colin Powell Elementary School PTA
Clifton Elementary School PTA Providence Elementary School PTA
Willow Springs Elementary School PTA Greenbriar West Elementary School PTA
Union Mill Elementary School PTA London Towne Elementary School PTA
Deer Park Elementary School PTA Poplar Tree Elementary School PTA
Fairview Elementary School PTA

How come Sangster elementary school PTA did NOT sign the resolution? They fought to have Clifton closed and now they got Liz Bradsher to cut a deal for the school. Sangster now gets no new kids. The even said it would change the community feel. Wow, these are same people who called Clifton folks snobs.

Question about option D/E Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come Sangster elementary school PTA did NOT
> sign the resolution? They fought to have Clifton
> closed and now they got Liz Bradsher to cut a deal
> for the school. Sangster now gets no new kids. The
> even said it would change the community feel. Wow,
> these are same people who called Clifton folks
> snobs.

Please get you facts straight. "They" did NOT "fight" to have Clifton closed. "They" did NOT say it would change the community. Those were isolated comments by two separate people. However, it it curious how the final and recommended option so drastically changed to.

Sangster in longer in the option mix for Clifton elementary. Oak View is now in option D. Oak View is too far for many Clifton elementary children. You don't care though since your school is not closing.

The comments made by Sangster were by people who represent the school.

I do have my facts straight Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sangster in longer in the option mix for Clifton
> elementary. Oak View is now in option D. Oak View
> is too far for many Clifton elementary children.
> You don't care though since your school is not
> closing.
>
> The comments made by Sangster were by people who
> represent the school.

Again you make assumptions, this time about what I care about and you are wrong. "Sangster" did not make any comments. Here's what we know. We've seen the principal's comment via our SB rep and we know that the PTA Rep for the SW Boundary Committee pushed hard to have the CES closed. AND we know per FOIA emails that our SB Rep and Sangter's PTA rep are friends. That does not indict all families who go to Sangster. The relationship between the SB rep and the SW Boundry rep is what I find....... collusive.

You can't generalize about Sangster parents any more than you can about Clifton parents. Bob Larsen and the principal did not want Sangster to take on any new kids. How are Sangster parents reacting to Larsen's actions? Is he the hero?

q&a Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You can't generalize about Sangster parents any
> more than you can about Clifton parents. Bob
> Larsen and the principal did not want Sangster to
> take on any new kids. How are Sangster parents
> reacting to Larsen's actions? Is he the hero?

NO!

Here's a theory so follow along kids...

Sangster is in Bradsher's district-more than half of Sangster kids have Fairfax Station addresses and therefore go to LBSS. The WSHS families that go to Sangster have already been screwed....again and will never vote for her. Make the FFX Station people happy = votes. Sangster is being played!

Sangster was taken off the table. Trailers will not be brought in to take in Clifton(elite, snobby, lilly white smart) kids. They are in the free and clear.

The Sangster PTA and principle knew this all along. At first they said they would accept kids. Now you say the Clifton kids are going to disrupt your community????

NOBODY cared in Fairfax about Clifton till they found out that they would need to make room for the Clifton elementary kids.

I am so glad I can afford private school. FCPS are a disgrace.

We will not have busses because our school is now within 1 mile of our house to Poplar.

Make little Biff walk to school. I always laugh at moms who drive their kids four blocks to school. We had one mom who kept driving her sixth grade son. What a pussy.

stayingput () - regarding GBE to GBW:

The boundary being moved from GBE to GBW was in GBW till a few years back. So, many parents are actually glad this is happening. In addition, the move makes sense, just from looking at the map.

I can personally attest to the fact that a full day KG is a waste of both my kids time and county tax payers money.

Option D actually does a great job of matching a community with school boundary.

I guess only whiners are on this board.

How come all the schools are not in this petition? I guess only those who had a same point of view ( don't care what is happening elsewhere and dont change anything with our school) signed on.

Oak View Elementary School PTA Colin Powell Elementary School PTA
Clifton Elementary School PTA Providence Elementary School PTA
Willow Springs Elementary School PTA Greenbriar West Elementary School PTA
Union Mill Elementary School PTA London Towne Elementary School PTA
Deer Park Elementary School PTA Poplar Tree Elementary School PTA
Fairview Elementary School PTA

sw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How come all the schools are not in this petition?
> I guess only those who had a same point of view (
> don't care what is happening elsewhere and dont
> change anything with our school) signed on.
>
> Oak View Elementary School PTA Colin Powell
> Elementary School PTA
> Clifton Elementary School PTA Providence
> Elementary School PTA
> Willow Springs Elementary School PTA Greenbriar
> West Elementary School PTA
> Union Mill Elementary School PTA London Towne
> Elementary School PTA

All of the PTAs In the study were engaged to sign on. It has been a bit of an eye opener to see how many "are afraid" of going against the FCPS Board. Like some sort of retribution might occur to them if they sign-on.
> Deer Park Elementary School PTA Poplar Tree
> Elementary School PTA
> Fairview Elementary School PTA

Justataxpayer () - that BS.

And in addition the PTA's are also acting quite adamantly.

I am more than happy to see my kid go to Poplar Tree ( from GBW ) - but sure, the PTA goes ahead and submits a petition, even w/o soliciting much feedback.


The parents on these boards should focus more on what is being taught in the public school ( which is not much) and stop worrying about some necessary changes.

trw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Justataxpayer () - that BS.
>
> And in addition the PTA's are also acting quite
> adamantly.
>
> I am more than happy to see my kid go to Poplar
> Tree ( from GBW ) - but sure, the PTA goes ahead
> and submits a petition, even w/o soliciting much
>

If the PTA did not represent your viewpoint you can have your voice heard by speaking at the upcoming public hearings on the boundaries. Now remember that some of the School Board members listen only to the silence, so be sure to speak quietly and agree adamantly with everying they say so you might actually be heard.

Have heard a lot about the cost of the additions. What about the cost of purchasing all the new trailers for these different schools that will serve as a temporary solution? Why isn't that cost being included in the total cost? If FCPS can keep crying to the County and the State that they don't have enough money and about overcrowding than they can't possibly just have a bunch of empty trailers sitting around somewhere.... How much is it going to cost to purchase all the trailers for these different schools?

Also, are there bathrooms in the trailers? If a young child has to go into the main building to use the bathroom, who is escorting them from the trailer to the main building? Does the teacher leave the rest of the class? How do they deal with child safety/security in this type of scenario?

Justataxpayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> trw Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Justataxpayer () - that BS.
> >
> > And in addition the PTA's are also acting quite
> > adamantly.
> >
> > I am more than happy to see my kid go to Poplar
> > Tree ( from GBW ) - but sure, the PTA goes
> ahead
> > and submits a petition, even w/o soliciting
> much
> >
>
> If the PTA did not represent your viewpoint you
> can have your voice heard by speaking at the
> upcoming public hearings on the boundaries. Now
> remember that some of the School Board members
> listen only to the silence, so be sure to speak
> quietly and agree adamantly with everying they say
> so you might actually be heard.


There are those Board Members, however, that will listen if you AGREE with their viewpoint that this Boundary Study is the best solution as they are proposing it in which case they will take a quote out of your speech and give it to their Spin/Media Department who will then quickly publish it out to the Press and media as though it is the justification for everything. Everyone else will be ignored. That seems to be how the Public Hearings really work.

I still don't get why this study has to involve 20 schools.

If Clifton wasn't closed, how many schools are actually overcrowded?

Please don't direct me to some 20 page document or link-can you just list them?

Thanks-

GBE currently has 8 trailers and six full time kindergartens. When you look at the proposed plans for the 15 new classrooms, with all of their additions,they are proposing creating new parking spots on top of neighbors backyards. I wish this study and all of the proposed options matched our community with the boundaries, but it just doesn't, If you ever look at the GBE and the GBW boundary map, it looks like a 1st grader was trying to trace lines. In some cases, houses on the same street don't attend the same schools. In other cases, one side of the street is GBE and the other GBW. Children that are next door neighbors sometimes don't attend the same schools b/c streets are just divided randomly by the boundaries. If you look at GBE's school profile, it shows 68% English proficiency with GBW being 85%. Most of GBE is Fair lakes apartments and condos and not families in Greenbriar.

Why 20 schools?
If Clifton wasn't closed, how many schools are actually overcrowded?

ALL 196 SCHOOLS ARE OVERCROWDED! This will be a problem always facing this County.

Here is the deal. Clifton was a neglected dump so they closed it. Now they are going to drop the kids into other schools. The County will decide where your children will go. They need a good mix of the kids from the big houses as well as the kids from the shitty apartments.

Kids from the big houses do well on the tests and typically the kids in the shitty apartments do not. The schools need a balance, so you don't have too many shitty kids bringing down any one particular school.

It does not matter how much you whine about it, they will do what they want. Just relax, take a deep breath, and put it all in perspective. You all live in one of the wealthiest economies in this country. Some of you need to take a step outside of Fairfax and see what passes for education in other parts of this country.

GBE parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GBE currently has 8 trailers and six full time
> kindergartens. When you look at the proposed plans
> for the 15 new classrooms, with all of their
> additions,they are proposing creating new parking
> spots on top of neighbors backyards. I wish this
> study and all of the proposed options matched our
> community with the boundaries, but it just
> doesn't, If you ever look at the GBE and the GBW
> boundary map, it looks like a 1st grader was
> trying to trace lines. In some cases, houses on
> the same street don't attend the same schools. In
> other cases, one side of the street is GBE and the
> other GBW. Children that are next door neighbors
> sometimes don't attend the same schools b/c
> streets are just divided randomly by the
> boundaries. If you look at GBE's school profile,
> it shows 68% English proficiency with GBW being
> 85%. Most of GBE is Fair lakes apartments and
> condos and not families in Greenbriar.

They could have brought a lot of the GBE Fair Lakes Apartments and condos kids down a short drive down Clifton Road to CLifton Elementary and a lot of the overcrowding would have then been solved with some minor other changes. However, than Liz Bradsher wouldn't have been able to bump CES off the renovation queue in order to please WSHS and Tessie and Stu Gibson's schools would have had to wait for renovation because they were also after CES. This side of the county is getting screwed.

OR

They also could have built a new school where Mountain View Alternative (old Centreville Elementary) is but OOPS (surprise! surprise!) the Facilities Department forgot to give that option to the Committee that studied this last summer. When they asked for properties that one wasn't included even thought it was right in the epicenter of crowding and even though at the same time they were trying to decide where to move alternative students too.

Thats Why Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why 20 schools?
> If Clifton wasn't closed, how many schools are
> actually overcrowded?
>
> ALL 196 SCHOOLS ARE OVERCROWDED! This will be a
> problem always facing this County.

Not true. Many schools are not utilized in the most efficient manner. Many have classrooms designed for 30 children where fewer than 10 are taught. It is poor planning that is causing the problems where they exist.

>
> Here is the deal. Clifton was a neglected dump so
> they closed it.

How many FCPS facilities have you been in? Have ou ever been inside of Clifton Elementary? Part of the school is old but not a dump.

Well, funny thing, as I go thru the CIP, I see a number of schools that are under capacity.

Fox Mill 109 seats available
Willow Springs 253 seats available
Fairfax Villa 43 seats available
Oak Hill 116 seats available
Lees Corner 23 seats available
Brookfield 42 seats available
Centre Ridge 24 seats
Union Mill 32 seats

etc, etc,....

Again, if Clifton folks aren't added into this mix, would we have an overcrowding problem that couldn't be resolved involving only a few schools?

I don't get why this has to be so massive.

Seriously - will Clifton folks stop thinking this is all about them?

There are major over-crowding issues across several schools and in many case boundaries are plain silly ( as someone earlier pointed it out - thank you much!)

The SW boundary changes are attempting to correct some of these issues. And they are doing a pretty decent job at that.

So the PTA's from all the schools need to really stop getting hyper and gossiping about how the FCPS board is out to screw the lives of kids in the community.

Well, funny thing, as I go thru the CIP, I see a number of schools that are under capacity.

Fox Mill 109 seats available
Willow Springs 253 seats available
Fairfax Villa 43 seats available
Oak Hill 116 seats available
Lees Corner 23 seats available
Brookfield 42 seats available
Centre Ridge 24 seats
Union Mill 32 seats

I'm not sure this is true. If you look at the membership profile, I see that Oak Hill has 850 students. This is with the use of a modular unit. I find it hard to believe there are 116 seats available. The gym and cafeteria are small.

For all of you that believe what FCPS is telling you about Clifton, here's more proof that they lied about the water problems. Even this email is misleading. Copper and lead don't come from the ground! They come from copper plumbing with lead solders. The wells at Clifton were never the problem, ineffective equipment was the problem.




Dear Clifton Elementary Parent:

Since October 2008, students and staff at Clifton Elementary School have used bottled water for drinking due to elevated lead and copper levels in the groundwater system (wells). After careful analysis, a team of experts agreed that the elevated levels resulted from the inability of the corrosion control system to sufficiently control the low pH in the groundwater. This team was composed of representatives from the Virginia Department of Health’s Office of Drinking Water, Virginia Machinery and Well Company (a drinking water treatment industry expert), and Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) engineers, and maintenance, safety and environmental staff.

As a result of these findings, FCPS staff installed a new corrosion filtration system in May 2010, capable of raising the pH level of the water, which reduces the amount of copper and lead in the water.

We are pleased to report that the water is now safe to drink as the pH level has been raised sufficiently and the water is no longer leaching lead or copper into the distribution system. This report is based on the two most recent tests, the results of which were in full compliance with the Commonwealth of Virginia and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Lead and Copper rule.

With the new corrosion control system optimally working and having consistently favorable water results, FCPS maintenance staff will remove the water fountain bubbler covers and replace any missing water fountain spigots. They will also clean and flush these devices to prepare them for use. This work will take place during the upcoming teacher workdays on January 31 and February 1. Drinking fountains will be safe and fully operational beginning on February 2.

For those staff and students who might be concerned about water quality and would like to continue using bottled water, FCPS will provide bottled water for their use.

FCPS staff will be regularly testing and monitoring the water quality and distribution system to ensure the safety of the water supply.

We anticipate that staff, parents, and students may have questions or concerns regarding the well water. Please feel free to direct those questions or concerns to Douglass O’Neill, Coordinator of Safety and Environmental Health, at 571-423-2016 or at doneill@fcps.edu. Thank you very much.




-----About this E-mail-----

This e-mail has been sent to you by FCPS. To maximize their communication with you, you may be receiving this e-mail in addition to a phone call with the same message. If you wish to discontinue this service, please inform FCPS IN PERSON, by US MAIL, by TELEPHONE at (571) 423-1210 or REPLY TO THIS E-MAIL.

Is it possible that this letter is giving FCPS an "out" to gracefully change its mind about closing Clifton? Maybe a little common sense will kick in.....

reader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is it possible that this letter is giving FCPS an
> "out" to gracefully change its mind about closing
> Clifton? Maybe a little common sense will kick
> in.....


"As a result of these findings, FCPS staff installed a new corrosion filtration system in May 2010, capable of raising the pH level of the water, which reduces the amount of copper and lead in the water"

If the filtration was installed in May 2010 wouldn't they have known this when they voted in July?

And why the need for bottled water still if the "problem" was fixed last May?

Clifton well water Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> reader Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Is it possible that this letter is giving FCPS
> an
> > "out" to gracefully change its mind about
> closing
> > Clifton? Maybe a little common sense will kick
> > in.....
>
>
> "As a result of these findings, FCPS staff
> installed a new corrosion filtration system in May
> 2010, capable of raising the pH level of the
> water, which reduces the amount of copper and lead
> in the water"
>
> If the filtration was installed in May 2010
> wouldn't they have known this when they voted in
> July?
>
> And why the need for bottled water still if the
> "problem" was fixed last May?

The problem is FCPS indicated anyone consuming the well water would likely wind up glowing in the dark and contracting all kinds of cancers. You can read the report they provided during the SW Boundary Study process. The preliminary report indicating the radioactive material was no longer present in the water didn't get released until partially during the actual meeting where the vote to close occurred and then the final bit came a week or so after the vote to close.

I would say that the reason they would offer bottled water (in large water coolers, not individual bottles by the way as Liz Bradsher thought was the case) was the fact they scared the crap out of some of the parents when they put forward all the cancer causing reports about the well water reports prior to the "fix". And actually, there were 2 "fixes" implemented. 1) Was as noted in the e-mail they installed the new corrosion filtration system and 2) Required them to decrease the depth of one of the wells which was producing the radioactive water. In the case of item 2 the reason the water was radioactive was it was actually coming from an aquifer above the radioactive rock layer and then falling down into the bottom of the 600ft or so deep well and collecting radioactive matter on the way back up the well to the pump house. The well bottom was brought up to the aquifer level and the water no longer was passing through the radioactive layer and voila, no more radioactive well water.

To be honest, you dont know which battle to fight. Every day its a different one. Bere that its GBE and Fair Lakes Trailors. Today its the water. Then its GBW 1/2 day kindergarten. Then its no busses. Then its no PTA. Get focus people.

Justataxpayer wrote:

2) Required them to decrease the depth of one of the wells which was producing the radioactive water. In the case of item 2 the reason the water was radioactive was it was actually coming from an aquifer above the radioactive rock layer and then falling down into the bottom of the 600ft or so deep well and collecting radioactive matter on the way back up the well to the pump house. The well bottom was brought up to the aquifer level and the water no longer was passing through the radioactive layer and voila, no more radioactive well water.


But this is the well that is not even hooked up to the school. Has it been reconnected? I don't believe it has. I think they simply "fixed" the ph issues and are still using the same wells that serve the school now. My understanding is that well #3, the one with the supposed contamination issue is simply a back up well in case one of the other 2 that currently serve the school fail.

"The wells at Clifton were never the problem, ineffective equipment was the problem."

Wells??? Are we living in the middle ages? Just goes to show how stubborn opinions get. Any fool will realize that a school which gets its water from a well in this day and age is probably nearing its end.

And to Thats Why () - who thinks its OK to call kids 'shitty' - take a moment to reflect on your state of mind.

iowef Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "The wells at Clifton were never the problem,
> ineffective equipment was the problem."
>
> Wells??? Are we living in the middle ages? Just
> goes to show how stubborn opinions get. Any fool
> will realize that a school which gets its water
> from a well in this day and age is probably
> nearing its end.
>
> And to Thats Why () - who thinks its OK to call
> kids 'shitty' - take a moment to reflect on your
> state of mind.
There are houses built all the time in Fairfax County that have wells. Of the 200 families that attend Clifton Elem, 75-80% are on well water.

herewegoagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For all of you that believe what FCPS is telling
> you about Clifton, here's more proof that they
> lied about the water problems. Even this email is
> misleading. Copper and lead don't come from the
> ground! They come from copper plumbing with lead
> solders. The wells at Clifton were never the
> problem, ineffective equipment was the problem.
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Clifton Elementary Parent:
>
> Since October 2008, students and staff at Clifton
> Elementary School have used bottled water for
> drinking due to elevated lead and copper levels in
> the groundwater system (wells). After careful
> analysis, a team of experts agreed that the
> elevated levels resulted from the inability of the
> corrosion control system to sufficiently control
> the low pH in the groundwater. This team was
> composed of representatives from the Virginia
> Department of Health’s Office of Drinking Water,
> Virginia Machinery and Well Company (a drinking
> water treatment industry expert), and Fairfax
> County Public Schools (FCPS) engineers, and
> maintenance, safety and environmental staff.
>
> As a result of these findings, FCPS staff
> installed a new corrosion filtration system in May
> 2010, capable of raising the pH level of the
> water, which reduces the amount of copper and lead
> in the water.
>
> We are pleased to report that the water is now
> safe to drink as the pH level has been raised
> sufficiently and the water is no longer leaching
> lead or copper into the distribution system. This
> report is based on the two most recent tests, the
> results of which were in full compliance with the
> Commonwealth of Virginia and the U.S.
> Environmental Protection Agency Lead and Copper
> rule.
>
> With the new corrosion control system optimally
> working and having consistently favorable water
> results, FCPS maintenance staff will remove the
> water fountain bubbler covers and replace any
> missing water fountain spigots. They will also
> clean and flush these devices to prepare them for
> use. This work will take place during the upcoming
> teacher workdays on January 31 and February 1.
> Drinking fountains will be safe and fully
> operational beginning on February 2.
>
> For those staff and students who might be
> concerned about water quality and would like to
> continue using bottled water, FCPS will provide
> bottled water for their use.
>
> FCPS staff will be regularly testing and
> monitoring the water quality and distribution
> system to ensure the safety of the water supply.
>
>
> We anticipate that staff, parents, and students
> may have questions or concerns regarding the well
> water. Please feel free to direct those questions
> or concerns to Douglass O’Neill, Coordinator of
> Safety and Environmental Health, at 571-423-2016
> or at doneill@fcps.edu. Thank you very much.
>
>
>
>
> -----About this E-mail-----
>
> This e-mail has been sent to you by FCPS. To
> maximize their communication with you, you may be
> receiving this e-mail in addition to a phone call
> with the same message. If you wish to discontinue
> this service, please inform FCPS IN PERSON, by US
> MAIL, by TELEPHONE at (571) 423-1210 or REPLY TO
> THIS E-MAIL.


This is a letter that Clifton parents just received?

"Of the 200 families that attend Clifton Elem, 75-80% are on well water."

Clearly its points to why FCPS chose to close CES

I am honestly sorry for CES parents - but from FCPS point of view, looks like it made no sense to invest additional $ into a resource that was serving so few families.

uninformed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> iowef Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "The wells at Clifton were never the problem,
> > ineffective equipment was the problem."
> >
> > Wells??? Are we living in the middle ages? Just
> > goes to show how stubborn opinions get. Any
> fool
> > will realize that a school which gets its water
> > from a well in this day and age is probably
> > nearing its end.
> >
> > And to Thats Why () - who thinks its OK to call
> > kids 'shitty' - take a moment to reflect on
> your
> > state of mind.
>
There are houses built all the time in Fairfax
> County that have wells. Of the 200 families that
> attend Clifton Elem, 75-80% are on well water.

Not to mention the hundreds of houses by fountainhead park that go to Lake Braddock, and houses in Oakton.

My house is twenty years old. I bought my house three years ago. We had our well tested and we have a filtration system. It works great and the water is no problem.

I never thought the water at the school was a deal. If anything I gave water bottles to my kids each day to go with lunch. Water is better for you teeth ect. It has NEVER ben a big deal at Clifton. Plus after the H1N1 who would wants a child drinking out of a nasty fountain?

>
> This is a letter that Clifton parents just
> received?



Yes, Clifton Elem parents received this letter today via FCPS keep-in-touch email.

iowef Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Of the 200 families that attend Clifton Elem,
> 75-80% are on well water."
>
> Clearly its points to why FCPS chose to close CES
>
>
> I am honestly sorry for CES parents - but from
> FCPS point of view, looks like it made no sense to
> invest additional $ into a resource that was
> serving so few families.


I'm sorry, I truly mean no offense by what I'm about to say, but you don't know what you are talking about.

It is NOT necessary to invest additional $$$$$ at CES right now. In this economy, FCPS SHOULD be focusing on the schools that are in desperate need of renovations. CES isn't one of them. That is not a reason to close it.

As for "serving so few families", the attendance area for CES consists of over 2200 homes. Not all of those homes currently have elementary school aged children. Many are now in MS and HS, and many are empty nesters. Many of the empty nesters will be moving on at some point, and those homes will sell. What are the odds of families with small children moving in? There are several new families in Clifton this year, and many of them have small children that will attend school in the next 2-4 years, myself included.

In addition, the school is currently at 99% capacity. Clearly, the attendance for the school is not a problem. Before you say 'well, in that case, the school is just too small to maintain.' There are many schools smaller than CES and
the great majority of them are much more expensive to maintain.

Oh yeah, and CES just won the 2011 Virginia Board of Education Excellence Award.

READ this thread from the very beginning and you'll start to see the light.

offtopic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To be honest, you dont know which battle to fight.
> Every day its a different one. Bere that its GBE
> and Fair Lakes Trailors. Today its the water.
> Then its GBW 1/2 day kindergarten. Then its no
> busses. Then its no PTA. Get focus people.


The core issue is that the closing of Clifton is creating this domino effect of other issues and new or unresolved problems so the discussion is now scattered. People are focusing in on which issue is personally affecting them whether it is boundaries or PTA or whatever but it is all being spawned from the same core issue which is the closing of Clifton.

This is only the beginning. Once they are done with screwing around with the elementary schools they are going to go after the middle and high school boundaries. This magnitude of changes could have been avoided though had they not voted to close Clifton. It is simply common sense that if you close a school in area that supposedly already has overcrowding that this would happen. If there was something truly wrong with Clifton it would be illegal for them to have kids attending it right now. It wouldn't have just won the Governor's Award, etc.

GBW is okay. GBW Principal smiles a lot. Principal at Rocky Run will not allow for boundary changes at his school. No worries there. Liberty will do as told they are a new school. Chantilly needs a new turf field but is good other than that. Centreville is old. Westfield has bad rap. I support decision to keep us at GBW. I am sure the principal at GBW will miss us if we leave. Keep us there.

I would love to stay at GBW, but do I think it is going to happen -- no. I think the school board has been very involved in this final "staff plan". I think the are purposely not flaunting it on the site to keep people unaware. I do not know how many parents I have talked to even with PTA emails being sent out that are not aware that Option D is gone baby gone. I have written my letters. I will go to the board meeting and be involved. That said - when I end up at Poplar Tree next year, I will be actively involved and help make a smooth and positive transition for my children. I think the school board is filled with stubborn individuals that cater to those who line their reelection coffers and they are out for themselves - the BS that they are trying to do a plan that effects the least people is not the case. The fact that they are making clean boundaries flies out the window when a portion of our area (the closest to Poplar Tree by the way and on this side of Stringfellow still goes to GBW??). They are going to do what they want and it is going to get pushed through to start this fall - I still plan to speak out but I feel like it is bailing a sinking ship with a dixie cup .

I like the chocolate and vanilla mixed dixie cups from Giant in the 8 pack. But that is not important. stayingput we should go to the meeting together. Do you still work at the school or just focusng on the kids for now.

Will those off of Stringfellow to Poplar be bussed?

Wells??? Are we living in the middle ages? Just
> goes to show how stubborn opinions get. Any fool
> will realize that a school which gets its water
> from a well in this day and age is probably
> nearing its end.


Do people understand that water sinks into the ground and is stored in underground aquifers? No wonder this country is failing in science. Yes, you can get it from a river, but there are tons of wells in this country and lots of people would have no water if not for wells! I grew up and my whole town's water was from wells. Where do people get these strange ideas about water?? Some of the best water you can drink comes from under the ground (not on top!). This is not a middle ages concept at all. If you enjoy drinking runoff water with chlorine in it, fine. The problem with Clifton was not the well---it was the pipes---which are a problem all over the place because lead was used in the past for pipes. This problem affects your water that is coming from the rivers also.

Why would FCPS pay to have the lines flushed and work on the water fountains for two days if Clifton is closing in June? Why waste the money if you are going to close the school?

I hope this is a sign that Clifton is now going to stay open. I am keeping my fingers crossed.

GBWisokay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Will those off of Stringfellow to Poplar be
> bussed?


As the final proposal sets those off Marshall Crown and along Veronica Rd to a certain point will be bussed to GBW.

Worthington Woods goes to Poplar Tree and everything back from there - all the neighborhoods off Doyle would go as well and the additional streets behind there. Page 20 of the appendix of the final proposal lists the HOAs being moved, but I know the Veronica Road HOA gets split somewhere and it is very hard from the provided map to ascertain the exact cutoff.

Common sense would dictate that the Marshall Crown bus is the same bus that would go through the rest of Northbourne and pick up the kids who are in the AAP center at GBW as well (but I have not seen a lot of sommone sense when it comes to this or any bus issues EVER). There would be at least 1 if not 2 buses from Poplar Tree to pick up kids who lived in the transition area. I know off Doyle they have had to have 2 buses because the Heathrow stop fills almost a whole bus, but when you add the rest of the Doyle stops it puts it past maximum (they try every few years for the first week and then go back to 2 buses for a couple of years till they forget and try it as one again). They will have to provide the bussing based on the distance elementary equation - so they do not save any money there, but I really don't think our move has anything to do with saving on transportation.

The comments on this list regarding the boundaries are almost comical. You act as though once the boundary study is done than you will know what school you are going too and this whole mess will be solved. Well, maybe you will know for one year. The people on this list are SERIOUSLY oblivious to what goes on in the rest of the County. For example, Floris Elementary was redistricted multiple times within 1-3 years.

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=322466&paper=66&cat=104

The only way you are going to save yourselves a lot of grief is if they don't shut down that school and you get them to stop this boundary study now. And you think you are going to get additions on your schools? Ha! Think again. You'll have those trailers for YEARS!!!! Eventually they will build that school they wanted to build in the first place and you will get shifted again! You need to wake up and start looking at what has been going on around the rest of the County because you are living in a bubble.

Will all of Hawthourne Forest HOA have buses? In snow we would not get there ever.

Here is another story for those of you that are living in a bubble about what goes on with redistricting.


"School officials are trying to force boundary changes on communities that have already been redistricted five times in nine years. One mother told The Examiner that her three daughters will have diplomas from three different high schools, even though the family hasn’t moved since 1991"

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/junk-fairfax-school-redistricting-plan?quicktabs_1=0#ixzz1CSR2PP8t

question about Clifton elementary Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why would FCPS pay to have the lines flushed and
> work on the water fountains for two days if
> Clifton is closing in June? Why waste the money if
> you are going to close the school?
>
> I hope this is a sign that Clifton is now going to
> stay open. I am keeping my fingers crossed.


Don't most of the "closed" schools get turned into FCPS Admin buildings? Trailers are okay for the kids but the staff gets brick and mortar buildings... For example, this School Board was ready to build Gatehouse II Admin Offices for themselves (complete with granite flooring and state of the art gym) why thousands of kids in the County are in trailers. If the County Supervisors hadn't stepped in and said No to Gatehouse II they WOULD have built it. Do you still believe in this boundary study and that your kids deserve to be put in trailers?

Read this:

"In the middle of what economists are calling a once-in-a-century economic free fall, when taxpayers are watching jobs, home equity and retirement funds literally disappearing before their eyes, Dale and the bobbleheads on the School Board want to spend another $130 million on overpaid school administrators instead of kids?"

"On a marble palace for paper-pushing adults while thousands of children have to learn in 900 flimsy trailers that cannot be secured, which one veteran teacher told me were nothing more than “chicken coops�"

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/opinion/2009/02/breaking-news-supervisors-just-say-no-gatehouse

Trailers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> question about Clifton elementary Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why would FCPS pay to have the lines flushed
> and
> > work on the water fountains for two days if
> > Clifton is closing in June? Why waste the money
> if
> > you are going to close the school?
> >
> > I hope this is a sign that Clifton is now going
> to
> > stay open. I am keeping my fingers crossed.
>
>
> Don't most of the "closed" schools get turned into
> FCPS Admin buildings? Trailers are okay for the
> kids but the staff gets brick and mortar
> buildings... For example, this School Board was
> ready to build Gatehouse II Admin Offices for
> themselves (complete with granite flooring and
> state of the art gym) why thousands of kids in the
> County are in trailers. If the County Supervisors
> hadn't stepped in and said No to Gatehouse II they
> WOULD have built it. Do you still believe in this
> boundary study and that your kids deserve to be
> put in trailers?
>
> Read this:
>
> "In the middle of what economists are calling a
> once-in-a-century economic free fall, when
> taxpayers are watching jobs, home equity and
> retirement funds literally disappearing before
> their eyes, Dale and the bobbleheads on the School
> Board want to spend another $130 million on
> overpaid school administrators instead of kids?"
>
> "On a marble palace for paper-pushing adults while
> thousands of children have to learn in 900 flimsy
> trailers that cannot be secured, which one veteran
> teacher told me were nothing more than “chicken
> coops�"
>
> http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/opinion/2009/0
> 2/breaking-news-supervisors-just-say-no-gatehouse


And with 900 flimsy trailers in the County, why would they prioritize building additions at YOUR schools. Get ready to live with the trailers!

I dont get it. This is all gossip.

Does anyone know if there are School Board members who have come out and said this final plan is no good? I know the vote is still coming, but I think certain members have made it very clear they will back it, Bradsher, Smith. Does anyone really feel we are going to change the minds of anyone by showing up? (guess I am feeling frustrated today). Also could they propose to make changes to the final plan or is it an all or none type of thing they vote on???