Thomas More Wrote:

> Ma'am I'm just trying to communicate that the same
> portion of Floris which Alternative Option
> proposes to send to SL would also go there under
> Option 6.
>
> Part of Floris is likely to be shifted to
> Coopermine when it opens. The balance has been
> referenced on this fourm as "East Floris." It is a
> term of art for ease of communication.
>

There appears to be an attempt to do next year's elementary school redistricting today. Before they redistrict Floris students to McNair or Coppermine, they are required by fcps rules to have:

1. a travesty of a study
2. town meetings where questions are not answered
3. opportunity for affected communites to make comments that are ignored

Expect Floris to be carved up so some students go to Westfield and some to South Lakes and then send half of them to another elementary school that feeds Herndon. If all goes as planned these kids can go to high school only knowing a couple dozen kids there.

Many parents whose high schools are involved in this high school boundary (redistricting) study in Western Fairfax County are concerned that this has been handled in an unfair, unjust, and possibly illegal manner based on incorrect and biased facts blended with strong-arm tactics. Having the school board members sit with their backs to the audience at the Chantilly public meeting sent a strong signal to parents, as did Stu turning off the microphone when handed to him by a parent. We do not understand why all the schools bordering South Lakes were not included (Langley) or only partially included (Madison) in the study. The FCPS Capital Improvement Program for 2008-2012 discusses the need for construction at Langley High School to relieve overcrowding, and states that since "adjacent high schools are operating at or above capacity" that "boundary adjustments to relieve this overcrowding are not possible." However, since Langley shares a boundary with South Lakes, which the school board indicates is over 700 short of enrollment capacity, the overcrowding at Langley could easily be accomodated by South Lakes.

To South Lakes supporters - I understand you believe in your cause fervently. But there's another issue emerging - and that is of the transparency of the School Board. If there is any truth to the emerging allegations that the School Board is holding hearings premised upon the consideration of four (4) options, yet are not really are considering any of them, or that the School Board is not dealing openly with the public, don't you recognize that whatever good you are purporting to do can all be swept away? People can made persuaded to set aside their doubts and fears - and no better way to do that than through fact based presentations. But of all this good work will go to waste if the perception emerges that the School Board consists of a bunch of manipulative despots who hold public hearings merely to manage the public relations surrounding their actions as opposed to truly inviting public participation. (I chalked up some of the initial grumblings to just people being irritated at the move - but heck, the detention of the guy who attempted to tape a public meeting - the FCPS director of operations stating that none of the four (4) options will really be the result - and other such facts really lead me to believe the School Board is acting like a bunch of apparatchiks). This to my mind puts South Lakes supporters in a tough spot - because no matter how badly you may want a result, if you are perceived to be too close to a process that is not transparent or meaningful, yikes -- !! - then people will go to great lengths to avoid the school. Yes, I can already anticipate the chorus of disagreement - i.e., the School Board is trying to do what is fair - but really, no action would enrage parents more on an already incredibly sensitive issue than if it becomes clear the School Board was acting as a Star Chamber, result already in hand, holding public hearings merely to manipulate the population. It won't work. I don't say this merely to proclaim doom, but to point out that people can, especially if the school puts its best foot forward, work through a result they don't like - but if people believe they were lied to or misled in the process, wow, that just won't work.

quantum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If there is any truth to the emerging allegations that the
> School Board is holding hearings premised upon the
> consideration of four (4) options, yet are not
> really are considering any of them,

I cannot find the worth of presenting four false options save for one scenario:

The SB never had the intention of implementing any of the four, but only guaged the public's reaction to one predetermined aspect of each option - not the whole, and then combine the one aspect from each individual option to arrive at an amalgam. Curiously, this amalgam resembled the South Lakes PTSA option #5 almost perfectly.

quantum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To South Lakes supporters - I understand you
> believe in your cause fervently. But there's
> another issue emerging - and that is of the
> transparency of the School Board. If there is
> any truth to the emerging allegations that the
> School Board is holding hearings premised upon the
> consideration of four (4) options, yet are not
> really are considering any of them, or that the
> School Board is not dealing openly with the
> public, don't you recognize that whatever good you
> are purporting to do can all be swept away?
> People can made persuaded to set aside their
> doubts and fears - and no better way to do that
> than through fact based presentations. But of all
> this good work will go to waste if the perception
> emerges that the School Board consists of a bunch
> of manipulative despots who hold public hearings
> merely to manage the public relations surrounding
> their actions as opposed to truly inviting public
> participation. (I chalked up some of the initial
> grumblings to just people being irritated at the
> move - but heck, the detention of the guy who
> attempted to tape a public meeting - the FCPS
> director of operations stating that none of the
> four (4) options will really be the result - and
> other such facts really lead me to believe the
> School Board is acting like a bunch of
> apparatchiks). This to my mind puts South Lakes
> supporters in a tough spot - because no matter how
> badly you may want a result, if you are perceived
> to be too close to a process that is not
> transparent or meaningful, yikes -- !! - then
> people will go to great lengths to avoid the
> school. Yes, I can already anticipate the chorus
> of disagreement - i.e., the School Board is trying
> to do what is fair - but really, no action would
> enrage parents more on an already incredibly
> sensitive issue than if it becomes clear the
> School Board was acting as a Star Chamber, result
> already in hand, holding public hearings merely to
> manipulate the population. It won't work. I
> don't say this merely to proclaim doom, but to
> point out that people can, especially if the
> school puts its best foot forward, work through a
> result they don't like - but if people believe
> they were lied to or misled in the process, wow,
> that just won't work.


Dear Quantum:

You are clearly a highly intelligent fellow. So I would suggest to you that most of the cries about lack of transparency, cowardly bullying, Star Chamberesque behavior is coming from a very small number of very loud people who are losing their options on how to preempt a decision that will impact them, as their earlier tactics have so far failed to derail the process.

Don't buy it. Getting redistricted to a school within 3 miles of your house that is in the top 3% of the country's public high schools is hardly akin to being sent to Siberia.

The idea that they are members of a large class of citizens "victimized" by covert actions/plans of educrat apparatchiks is absurd. It is good politics -- on their part -- that they have mobilized high-profile op-ed pieces in the Post and the Examiner, but it doesn't make them any more victimized, nor does it make their fundamental case any more preposterous, Mr. Bennett's documentary filmmaking aspirations notwithstanding.

A rational view of what is happening now yields the conclusion that staff is acting very carefully and -- yes -- politically in trying to move forward within the framework of what they are obligated to do. It's a political process overseen by elected officials and professional staff who have a county-wide school system to run, not a mandate to protect some small group's status quo from any change, ever.

First, there was the School Board election, which was a free and fair election and which -- if we go back 80 or so pages -- included many of the people forecasting doom and gloom for the incumbents who indicated support for a redistricting study and implementation of the results of that study. That -- their ouster by ballot -- didn't happen.

Second, there was the process and objectives of the study. Disagree with the scope and criteria, but they have been published, subjected to comment, and are the basis for where the staff and Board are going. That is not illegal, even if some people don't like the result.

If FCPS didn't effectively answer "Whither Langley", I fail to see how the four options presented at the December 3rd option are sufficiently different than the newest, modified option, so as to warrant the accusation that the first four were smokescreens or evidence of an evil cabal.

Take a look -- again (b/c you made some interesting comments earlier) at the criticisms from the SLHS community -- and from McNair -- after the first four, and you'll see that much of the criticism was on Staff's apparent fecklessness in attaching the only Title I school at issue (McNair) to the High School pyramids that already had Title I schools in their pyramids (SLHS and/or Herndon). Staff appears to have reacted to that criticism in formulating the modified Option....is that irrational, conspiratorial, or illegal? Hardly.

Did Herndon, for example -- untouched by this option after being considerably affected by the earlier 4 -- now hatch its conspiracy with FCPS apparatchiks in the latest version? Come on. Westfield would lose part of Floris; Oakton would lose Fox Mill and gain part of Navy; Madison would lose the "Island" and Chantilly would lose Navy. Is this really the result of an evil cabal?

I agree that, in an ideal world, Langley and Madison (and probably the entire county) could have been involved in a comprehensive Boundary study. But I highly doubt that the loudest proponents of "Where's Langley" are doing so b/c they want equity for all....they want no redistricting of their boundaries.

The fact that it is now a West county study means that, while it may not be a comprehensive, perfect solution, it doesn't make the objectives and how the staff and Board have proceeded to be fatally flawed or even misquided.

What is happening is that -- in a school district of 134K students, the parents of approximately 1,000 are trying to stop -- by any means possible -- the train that would effect a long-overdue redistricting and one that coincides with the completion of a $48M renovation of SLHS (also long-overdue, notwithstanding the blurts about SLHS expansion, special treatment, and the usual bs). We all now why -- fear of "gang-ridden, crappy" SLHS -- so let's make sure that we focus on who, how, and why the relatively few people are screaming the loudest.

Its greatest merit was the taking up again of dialectics as the highest form of reasoning. The old Greek philosophers were all born natural dialecticians, and Aristotle, the most encyclopaedic of them, had already analyzed the most essential forms of dialectic thought. The newer philosophy, on the other hand, although in it also dialectics had brilliant exponents (e.g. Descartes and Spinoza), had, especially through English influence, become more and more rigidly fixed in the so-called metaphysical mode of reasoning, by which also the French of the 18th century were almost wholly dominated, at all events in their special philosophical work. Outside philosophy in the restricted sense, the French nevertheless produced masterpieces of dialectic. We need only call to mind Diderot's Le Neveu de Rameau, and Rousseau's Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inegalite parmi less hommes. We give here, in brief, the essential character of these two modes of thought.

When we consider and reflect upon Nature at large, or the history of mankind, or our own intellectual activity, at first we see the picture of an endless entanglement of relations and reactions, permutations and combinations, in which nothing remains what, where and as it was, but everything moves, changes, comes into being and passes away. We see, therefore, at first the picture as a whole, with its individual parts still more or less kept in the background; we observe the movements, transitions, connections, rather than the things that move, combine, and are connected. This primitive, naive but intrinsically correct conception of the world is that of ancient Greek philosophy, and was first clearly formulated by Heraclitus: everything is and is not, for everything is fluid, is constantly changing, constantly coming into being and passing away.[A]

But this conception, correctly as it expresses the general character of the picture of appearances as a whole, does not suffice to explain the details of which this picture is made up, and so long as we do not understand these, we have not a clear idea of the whole picture. In order to understand these details, we must detach them from their natural, special causes, effects, etc. This is, primarily, the task of natural science and historical research: branches of science which the Greek of classical times, on very good grounds, relegated to a subordinate position, because they had first of all to collect materials for these sciences to work upon. A certain amount of natural and historical material must be collected before there can be any critical analysis, comparison, and arrangement in classes, orders, and species. The foundations of the exact natural sciences were, therefore, first worked out by the Greeks of the Alexandrian period , and later on, in the Middle Ages, by the Arabs. Real natural science dates from the second half of the 15th century, and thence onward it had advanced with constantly increasing rapidity. The analysis of Nature into its individual parts, the grouping of the different natural processes and objects in definite classes, the study of the internal anatomy of organized bodies in their manifold forms — these were the fundamental conditions of the gigantic strides in our knowledge of Nature that have been made during the last 400 years. But this method of work has also left us as legacy the habit of observing natural objects and processes in isolation, apart from their connection with the vast whole; of observing them in repose, not in motion; as constraints, not as essentially variables; in their death, not in their life. And when this way of looking at things was transferred by Bacon and Locke from natural science to philosophy, it begot the narrow, metaphysical mode of thought peculiar to the last century.

To the metaphysician, things and their mental reflexes, ideas, are isolated, are to be considered one after the other and apart from each other, are objects of investigation fixed, rigid, given once for all. He thinks in absolutely irreconcilable antitheses. His communication is 'yea, yea; nay, nay'; for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." For him, a thing either exists or does not exist; a thing cannot at the same time be itself and something else. Positive and negative absolutely exclude one another; cause and effect stand in a rigid antithesis, one to the other.

At first sight, this mode of thinking seems to us very luminous, because it is that of so-called sound commonsense. Only sound commonsense, respectable fellow that he is, in the homely realm of his own four walls, has very wonderful adventures directly he ventures out into the wide world of research. And the metaphysical mode of thought, justifiable and necessary as it is in a number of domains whose extent varies according to the nature of the particular object of investigation, sooner or later reaches a limit, beyond which it becomes one-sided, restricted, abstract, lost in insoluble contradictions. In the contemplation of individual things, it forgets the connection between them; in the contemplation of their existence, it forgets the beginning and end of that existence; of their repose, it forgets their motion. It cannot see the woods for the trees.

For everyday purposes, we know and can say, e.g., whether an animal is alive or not. But, upon closer inquiry, we find that his is, in many cases, a very complex question, as the jurists know very well. They have cudgelled their brains in vain to discover a rational limit beyond which the killing of the child in its mother's womb is murder. It is just as impossible to determine absolutely the moment of death, for physiology proves that death is not an instantaneous, momentary phenomenon, but a very protracted process.

In like manner, every organized being is every moment the same and not the same; every moment, it assimilates matter supplied from without, and gets rid of other matter; every moment, some cells of its body die and others build themselves anew; in a longer or shorter time, the matter of its body is completely renewed, and is replaced by other molecules of matter, so that every organized being is always itself, and yet something other than itself.

Further, we find upon closer investigation that the two poles of an antithesis, positive and negative, e.g., are as inseparable as they are opposed, and that despite all their opposition, they mutually interpenetrate. And we find, in like manner, that cause and effect are conceptions which only hold good in their application to individual cases; but as soon as we consider the individual cases in their general connection with the universe as a whole, they run into each other, and they become confounded when we contemplate that universal action and reaction in which causes and effects are eternally changing places, so that what is effect here and now will be cause there and then, and vice versa.

None of these processes and modes of thought enters into the framework of metaphysical reasoning. Dialectics, on the other hand, comprehends things and their representations, ideas, in their essential connection, concatenation, motion, origin and ending. Such processes as those mentioned above are, therefore, so many corroborations of its own method of procedure.

Nature is the proof of dialectics, and it must be said for modern science that it has furnished this proof with very rich materials increasingly daily, and thus has shown that, in the last resort, Nature works dialectically and not metaphysically; that she does not move in the eternal oneness of a perpetually recurring circle, but goes through a real historical evolution. In this connection, Darwin must be named before all others. He dealt the metaphysical conception of Nature the heaviest blow by his proof that all organic beings, plants, animals, and man himself, are the products of a process of evolution going on through millions of years. But, the naturalists, who have learned to think dialectically, are few and far between, and this conflict of the results of discovery with preconceived modes of thinking, explains the endless confusion now reigning in theoretical natural science, the despair of teachers as well as learners, of authors and readers alike.

An exact representation of the universe, of its evolution, of the development of mankind, and of the reflection of this evolution in the minds of men, can therefore only be obtained by the methods of dialectics with its constant regard to the innumerable actions and reactions of life and death, of progressive or retrogressive changes. And in this spirit, the new German philosophy has worked. Kant began his career by resolving the stable Solar system of Newton and its eternal duration, after the famous initial impulse had once been given, into the result of a historical process, the formation of the Sun and all the planets out of a rotating, nebulous mass. From this, he at the same time drew the conclusion that, given this origin of the Solar system, its future death followed of necessity. His theory, half a century later, was established mathematically by Laplace, and half a century after that, the spectroscope proved the existence in space of such incandescent masses of gas in various stages of condensation.

SLHS Padre,
Well said. It seems to me that that FCPS DID try to respond to people's concerns. Too bad that a lot of them wasted their opportunity to be heard by shouting "moratiorium" and "magnet". FCPS repeatedly said that these options were not in their purview or power to make happen, so disregarded that input. Nothing illegal about that.

Seems to me that SL will be the ultimate losers, once again. Here you had an opportunity to get a magnet program and frittered it away because you were too busy gorging yourselves with the preposterous options presented by the SB.

There was a young SL student in our break out session who said what the students wanted most was a magnet school (TJ west). So, YOU have failed your own children.

Not illegal, but a real shame.

brosb4hos Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seems to me that SL will be the ultimate losers,
> once again. Here you had an opportunity to get a
> magnet program and frittered it away because you
> were too busy gorging yourselves with the
> preposterous options presented by the SB.
>
> There was a young SL student in our break out
> session who said what the students wanted most was
> a magnet school (TJ west). So, YOU have failed
> your own children.
>
> Not illegal, but a real shame.



And my youngest said what he wanted most was a $300+ IPod gizmo, and there's no way.

So, using your reasoning, I failed him. What a shame; what a loser.

First of all, I am not intelligent - in fact - Exodus refers to me as as a blowhard. And of course his record of intellectual and scholarly achievement surely must outstrip my own, by a long stretch, right?

You make some good points as to the general principle that those that scream the loudest often have, at least in transitory terms, an impact disproportionate to the quality of their ideas and the facts at hand. And I have little doubt that some of that is going on here - in fact, as I state - I was initially very skeptical about claims on both sides of the aisle and reflective of political posturing naturally incident to a very sensitive and contentious issue.

But why the detention of a man taping a meeting? The authorities undoubtedly know the law. It applies no matter what one may think of the video man's motives. It takes a certain arrogance to do that, one that is persuaded of the righteousness of a cause and hence somewhat immune to listening. What are they hiding? And why would the school's own head of operations opine that none of the four (4) options are workable? Guess what? If they are not workable, don't put them on the table - discuss something that is workable - and put those on the table. Don't invite people to talk about contentious issues in a hypothetical, as opposed to real and substantive, way. This is a simple principle - easy to follow and far more likely to work than not in terms of inculcating confidence. And that principle should apply irrespective of whether any other proposed option, in the opinion of some, is a mere variant or ellipis of what has already been proposed. Be up front with people, and don't get into bed with those that are not. Maybe the School Board is being up front with people, but the facts are not tilting in that direction. And I sure as heck wouldn't run a railroad that way, irrespective of the ultimate position I happened to favor.

And don't infer from my points that any sort of conspiracy is taking place - as opposed to the Board just operating in a dim and arrogant way - in fact - that is just the opposite of what I am averring. Conspiracies by and large do not work - there are too many parties, too many moving parts, and human nature, especially when it comes to Government, doesn't sustain them. That is exactly why the School Board should be as up front as can be about this situation - invariably the truth does come out - and when it does, the School Board, and those in league with change, ought to be able to say, irrespective of the result, we did what we said we would do. And axiomatically don't infer that those that will be unhappy with the process are victims - they are not - as I have said, most everyone's complaints about this school or the other are overblown (although some points have merit) - and my point is that the people affected will not be victims, but rather will be royally pissed off - pissed off enough to boycott with a serious vengeance the actions of the School Board - the distinction between a group being "victimized" and being super pissed off is a significant one, and if that was not made clear, I apologize.

And I concur with the comments about the behavior of some. I heard accounts of some of the antics at the public meetings. How silly. And besides, some of us really know how money and power works - and it doesn't work by screaming stop the madness at some high school cafeteria. I don't have any personal skin in this game - my kids won't be subject to any of this, but if I did, I can assure you that acting 1/3 my age at a public meeting would not be a means of moving the issue forward.

"id Herndon, for example -- untouched by this option after being considerably affected by the earlier 4 -- now hatch its conspiracy with FCPS apparatchiks in the latest version? Come on. Westfield would lose part of Floris; Oakton would lose Fox Mill and gain part of Navy; Madison would lose the "Island" and Chantilly would lose Navy. Is this really the result of an evil cabal? "

Leave the Navy kids alone and let us stay at Chantilly. A MAJORITY of the people being moved want to stay at thier school....Chantilly! We should not inherit a longer commute and less sense of community to satisfy SL parents. Think of another option.

I guess it should be expected that SL parents would equate the value of an iPod to an education. Not sure who you just called a loser - yourself or your youngest?

I guess you both are since you appear to be in the SL pyramid.

brosb4hos Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I guess it should be expected that SL parents
> would equate the value of an iPod to an education.
> Not sure who you just called a loser - yourself
> or your youngest?
>
> I guess you both are since you appear to be in the
> SL pyramid.


More whimsy from the flimsy. I didn't call myself or my progeny a loser.

And I didn't call all opponents of redistricting losers, simply because I heard from one....opponent.

Long time reader over the last 50+ pages of this thread over the past couple months since I became more intimately aware of this process.

I must say, if the level of discourse here is equivalent to what is happening in our schools, we are all in trouble.

That said, I can sit idle no longer. There are a few facts that I would hope all should have. As SLHS Padre said, there appears to be a vocal minority attempting to stop this process. I truly believe you are mistaken on this one. The fact that the minority has shrunk is merely an outcome of sighs of relief as more and more areas are spared from the proverbial chopping block.

I live in an affected area of Floris. I believe that the boundaries as they currently exist for this entire area are absurd. I also think that the planning in this county is ridiculous when it comes to locations of schools. I spoke up to Stephen Hunt prior to the election and asked why the study wasn't looking at a big picture solution and he said it was just too tough. I would submit that it is actually the opposite of that. If people did see that the whole of the area was being reviewed and there were clear drivers to the new boundaries that balanced enrollment (a certain percent of each school's capacity) and travel distance, etc (e.g., no student should have to travel more than X miles to Elementary School, Y miles to Middle, and Z miles to High), you would see a much more supportive public. You see, as much as people moan and groan, the schools are not about the buildings, they are about the people.

What started as a relatively clean "pyramid system" with feeder schools has turned into nothing more than a loosely configured set of schools under a single management entity (the new pyramid model). FCPS needs to step back and evaluate the ENTIRE area to attempt to regain the pyramid structure. It will make traversing the system that much more logical vs. the here, there and everywhere model that these options all propose.

We liked going to Oakton in our area, but we were forced to change and open Westfield. We adapted, and the school board promised us that we now had our high school (although I still believe an Oak Hill HS is necessary to truly balance the population and foster a more community based environment)

“and the people of Chantilly, Centreville, Floris, and Hutchison had their new high school; that he (Gibson) knew there were some people in the Floris and Hutchison communities who had wished to maintain their ties to Oakton High School, but that the future of these communities was in the west; that these communities shared homes, hopes, and challenges…”
FCPS MARCH 9, 2000 Board Meeting Minutes (page 269):

Additionally, South Lakes is in pretty good shape if you look at Falls Church HS - why hasn't that been an issue:
SOUTH LAKES HS
Capacity..........2100
2007 Enrollment...1443 (68.7% capacity)
ESOL Percentage...7.4% (11th most of 25 HS)
F&RLunch %........25.6% (8th most of 25 HS)
Post Index........63 (1.991)

NOW LOOK AT FALLS CHURCH:
Capacity..........2000
2007 Enrollment...1318 (65.9% capacity)
ESOL Percentage...15.6% (2nd most of 25 HS)
F&RLunch %........43.9% (2nd most of 25 HS)
Post Index........51 (2.245)

They seem to be in worse shape that South Lakes.

However, Mr. Gibson stated early on that it is really just an attempt to boost scores. “Increasing the student population at South Lakes High School with successful, supported students will only help to improve the positive instructional/social environment that already exists at South Lakes High School. School “report card” statistics will also take a significant leap upward with the influx of academically sound students.”
Stuart Gibson, FCPS School Board, 7/8/2006 – Crossfield Elementary PTA Meeting

I really feel for those students who are struggling at South Lakes, as these changes do nothing to address their issues.

You mention the pushing for Langley - yes, the FCPS staff is dealing with the hand that they themselves dealt. They made the recommendation for the scope, and the Board accepted it. They both messed up. The 2008-2012 CIP Book stated:
“Currently, nine temporary classroom trailers are used to accommodate excess enrollment (at Langley). Adjacent high schools are operating at or above capacity, thus boundary adjustments to relieve this overcrowding are not possible.”
FCPS CIP Book 2008 – 2012, page 19

If there weren't some politics involved there, I don't know what to call it. Talk about conflicting statements. South Lakes is your neighbor, Langley, and many students live much closer to your borders than the Langley school. Plus, in all the areas, including over enrollment, Langley would greatly improve the South Lakes numbers.

Overall, I guess the area around Floris gets hammered with these changes year in and year out because we are truly the middle class in this area. Not wealthy enough to buy our way out like the Langley and Madison's of the world, but not poor enough to not be wanted like the McNair area. So, we prepare for our 3rd High School in 7 years, our 6th Boundary activity in the last 10 and hope we don't fight too much with our neighbors next year when this happens again.

All we really want is to stop this process, have FCPS take a holistic view of the boundaries and improve them from the ground up. Quick fixes are what created this mess and quick fixes like the ones proposed here are just going to continue to propagate it.

quantum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To South Lakes supporters - I understand you
> believe in your cause fervently. But there's
> another issue emerging - and that is of the
> transparency of the School Board. If there is
> any truth to the emerging allegations that the
> School Board is holding hearings premised upon the
> consideration of four (4) options, yet are not
> really are considering any of them, or that the
> School Board is not dealing openly with the
> public, don't you recognize that whatever good you
> are purporting to do can all be swept away?
> People can made persuaded to set aside their
> doubts and fears - and no better way to do that
> than through fact based presentations. But of all
> this good work will go to waste if the perception
> emerges that the School Board consists of a bunch
> of manipulative despots who hold public hearings
> merely to manage the public relations surrounding
> their actions as opposed to truly inviting public
> participation. (I chalked up some of the initial
> grumblings to just people being irritated at the
> move - but heck, the detention of the guy who
> attempted to tape a public meeting - the FCPS
> director of operations stating that none of the
> four (4) options will really be the result - and
> other such facts really lead me to believe the
> School Board is acting like a bunch of
> apparatchiks). This to my mind puts South Lakes
> supporters in a tough spot - because no matter how
> badly you may want a result, if you are perceived
> to be too close to a process that is not
> transparent or meaningful, yikes -- !! - then
> people will go to great lengths to avoid the
> school. Yes, I can already anticipate the chorus
> of disagreement - i.e., the School Board is trying
> to do what is fair - but really, no action would
> enrage parents more on an already incredibly
> sensitive issue than if it becomes clear the
> School Board was acting as a Star Chamber, result
> already in hand, holding public hearings merely to
> manipulate the population. It won't work. I
> don't say this merely to proclaim doom, but to
> point out that people can, especially if the
> school puts its best foot forward, work through a
> result they don't like - but if people believe
> they were lied to or misled in the process, wow,
> that just won't work.

This is indeed where the Floris community has gravitated. Many who may have eventually settled into a South Lakes move, are now completely repulsed by the appearance that the South Lakes community has been manipulated and manipulative. This, combined by with the complete dismantling of the Floris community in the latest proposal has many in our community very angry and upset. I think that you will find many completely turned off and will do whatever is necessary to not step foot into South Lakes. I know this is not what South Lakes wants. And they will continue to believe that in the end we will all be one big happy family. But I think the approach that the school board has taken along with the South Lakes PTSA and/or community side-saddled, is probably the worst PR for the school yet.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2007 04:23PM by Flurries.

Flurries Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> This is indeed where the Floris community has
> gravitated. Many who may have eventually settled
> into a South Lakes move, are now completely
> repulsed by the appearance that the South Lakes
> community has been manipulated and manipulative.
> This, combined by with the complete dismantling of
> the Floris community in the latest proposal has
> many in our community very angry and upset. I
> think that you will find many completely turned
> off and will do whatever is necessary to not step
> foot into South Lakes. I know this is not what
> South Lakes wants. And they will continue to
> beleive that in the end we will all be one big
> happy family. But I think the approach that the
> school board has taken along with the South Lakes
> PTSA and/or community side-saddle, is probably the
> worst PR for the school yet.

Yes, I totally agree. By now, you have noticed that just about every separate room at the Westfield meeting proposed the same option 5, and that this just happens to be the final option we are all supposed to comment on at Oakton. The same option generated by the SLHS PTSA. All this will do is piss people off and make them determined to see this not succeed, as opposed to getting at any root causes of the real problems and working at real solutions to solve them.

I suggest you all go to the new CIP and look at the elementary schools etc. prior to agreeing or disagreeing with any scenario. It's a big document. I saw ne suspiciously overcrowded elementary school where no changes are recommended despite a domino situation being evident [high school feeder affects not wanted by school board members]. This despite changes would result in less travel time for all.

fcps homepage
[www.fcps.edu]

green sidebar on left - click on school board
[www.fcps.edu]

under school board meetings on bottom left click on BoardDocs (Agendas and Supporting Materials)

[www.boarddocs.com]

you will get to their Virginia School Board Assoc page and on the left are meeting dates - click on the little box for 12-20-07 then on the box for New Business:

6. New Business

6.01 FY 2009 - FY 2013 Capital Improvement Program - Recommendation to approve the FY 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program as described in the narrative and in the Superintendent’s Proposed FY 2009-2013 Capital Improvement Program Summary (FTS; action scheduled 1/24/08)

when you click on the section for 6.01 the middle window chnages and you get the Agenda item- at the bottom is a link to the CIP - since it's big I recommend opening it in a new window

taxpayer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I suggest you all go to the new CIP and look at
> the elementary schools etc. prior to agreeing or
> disagreeing with any scenario.

Oh Boy, we get to agree or disagree?! This will be an exciting change for the Floris and Fox Mill communities.

Shut THE FUCK UP, no one carem JUST SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT THIS POST<<<<<<

I can't figure out if you all are more mad because South Lakes took a proactive approach and tried to best meet the criteria spelled out by the SB with an improved suggested option, or because you didn't come up with your own suggestions to improve the options. What I witnessed at the large initial meeting and in the small group meetings were several parents, goaded on by StopRD, that refused to engage and offer concrete suggestions, and instead wasted their opportunity by screaming for a moratorium or a magnet, two options that were not on the table.

The citizens of the South Lakes community acted as I would expect all people who live in a Representative Republic to act. They participated in the process, educated themselves on the issue, relied on numbers, facts and data from which to recommended changes to improve each and every option presented, and an alternative option which might best meet the School Board's criteria.

If we lived my mob rule we would be a democracy, not a representative Republic, and we would have referenda, not elections. That is why we have an electoral college and a senate with two members from each state - so that the mob doesn't rule and the voices of the few can also be heard. What I find so ironic, and speaking as a true conservative, is that many of those opposed to redistricting and the process are the first to speak out in favor of the electoral college and the rights of the few when an election such as the Presidential one in 2000 is turned on its head and the popular vote outpaced the electoral college votes. You all elected the school board that we have, and you must be prepared to live by their decision. You can't change the rules in mid-play.

SLVerity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can't figure out if you all are more mad because
> South Lakes took a proactive approach and tried to
> best meet the criteria spelled out by the SB with
> an improved suggested option, or because you
> didn't come up with your own suggestions to
> improve the options.

I think most who are mad are feeling betrayed by an elected body who refuse to consider what many intelligent, educated people consider viable options to redistricting - the magnet option, to name one.

SLVerity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You all elected the school board that we
> have, and you must be prepared to live by their
> decision. You can't change the rules in mid-play.


Um, THEY did change the rules mid-play.

That is why there isn't an Open Town Hall process any longer. They didn't like what they heard at the first one.

>>>>if people believe they were lied to or misled in the process, wow, that just won't work.<<<<

In the beginning people felt they were being lied to about several things, including the reason for any are redistricting, why the public wasn't consulted from the beginning, why Langley was excluded and why there could be no consideration for a magnet of any kind. The public meetings re enforced the those feelings, making them stronger with each meeting. Now the public has gone from upset to furious. The community feels like they've been manipulated to attend useless meetings, ignored, manipulated, and lied to, over and over.

Our school board talks about transparency when there is NONE. Rather than hiring the Aspen Group to set up "strategic Governance" that is not understood by anyone, and seems designed only to pass the buck back and forth, they should have hired someone who knew something about facilitating real discussions with the public, instead of this adversarial mess they've set up. NO ONE is happy with this. It would be difficult to imagine how it could have been handled in a manner designed to upset the community more. Unfortunately, it is South Lakes that will suffer because of our school board's decisions throughout this 'process', or lack thereof.

The ONLY way to salvage this is to throw it all out and start over. It's not the end of the world if SL remains under enrolled for one more year. That's better than what we have now, all of this animosity. There are simply too many negative feelings for this to ever work out. Those feelings are directed at FCPS staff, the school board, and, unfortunately, South Lakes. That's not fair to South Lakes, but it is the reality.

>>>>1. a travesty of a study
2. town meetings where questions are not answered
3. opportunity for affected communities to make comments that are ignored<<<<

YUP. That sums it up well. A horrible process, very destructive.

Make your feelings know to the School Board and Staff.

Make sure you point out the obvious problems with Option 5:
1) No buffer at SL - too many students, there are many new housing projects planned for this area.
2) Does not address the high growth area McNair/Coppermine, lot's of housing projects going in here too.
3) School Board and Staff are pandering South Lakes PTSA, this has got to stop.

>>>The SB never had the intention of implementing any of the four, but only guaged the public's reaction to one predetermined aspect of each option - not the whole, and then combine the one aspect from each individual option to arrive at an amalgam. Curiously, this amalgam resembled the South Lakes PTSA option #5 almost perfectly.<<<

Oh yes, very curious. Quite the coincidence. lol

At least SOMEONE is happy with the final option, the South Lakes PTSA board.

Future Seahawk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SLVerity Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You all elected the school board that we
> > have, and you must be prepared to live by their
> > decision. You can't change the rules in
> mid-play.
>
>
> Um, THEY did change the rules mid-play.
>
> That is why there isn't an Open Town Hall process
> any longer. They didn't like what they heard at
> the first one.

And just how productive was that first meeting (the open session part)? To those of you who say you don't like the process, this has been on the table for a long time. You should have spoken up sooner about your desires to include Langley and Madison. Just because the criteria don't have everything you wanted does not make the process flawed. I have news for you, too. The Langley neighborhoods on this side of Rt. 7 are not the gold mine of students that this study needs. Look at the numbers. I am not saying that it would not have been nice to include them, but they would not have made much difference.

>>>You should have spoken up sooner about your desires to include Langley and Madison.<<<<

Could you please tell us when the public had that opportunity?

word Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Make your feelings know to the School Board and
> Staff.
>
> Make sure you point out the obvious problems with
> Option 5:
> 1) No buffer at SL - too many students, there are
> many new housing projects planned for this area.
> 2) Does not address the high growth area
> McNair/Coppermine, lot's of housing projects going
> in here too.
> 3) School Board and Staff are pandering South
> Lakes PTSA, this has got to stop.

Word, this SB has never pandered to SL. The school board staff does not expect any students generated from future Reston development, and they would be right. The few (around 5) who come from the RTC now are from the Shelter, and they are transient. Take a look at their November 12th meeting notes.:) There is no family development planned for Reston, try as you might to wish it were so.

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>You should have spoken up sooner about your
> desires to include Langley and Madison.<<<<
>
> Could you please tell us when the public had that
> opportunity?

You were free to contact your SB member at any time.

>>>>School Board and Staff are pandering South Lakes PTSA, this has got to stop.<<<<

I really don't think it's pandering to them as much as their option was preferred by Stu and he has the final say in what happens. Of course Stu and the PTSA may have worked on option 5 together. I really don't know. But I am sure that staff and Stu were happy to see it. Obviously.

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>The SB never had the intention of implementing
> any of the four, but only guaged the public's
> reaction to one predetermined aspect of each
> option - not the whole, and then combine the one
> aspect from each individual option to arrive at an
> amalgam. Curiously, this amalgam resembled the
> South Lakes PTSA option #5 almost perfectly.<<<
>
> Oh yes, very curious. Quite the coincidence. lol
>
>
> At least SOMEONE is happy with the final option,
> the South Lakes PTSA board.

I guess it's too far out of the realm of your perspective regarding the dunce parents of Reston, that we could have ever done something of our own initiative that was actually productive and smart.

SL Verity,
You are only kidding yourself. Any redistricting will not make a difference. Oakton has plenty of buffer with the proposed Option 5. The Fox Mill students will pupil place at a feverish pace. You will still be the doormat of FCPS.

Happy Festivus my Global Citizens!

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

Of course Stu
> and the PTSA may have worked on option 5 together.

You are absolutely 100% wrong about that.

> I really don't know.

You are absolutely 100% right about that.

But thanks for at least being fair and giving us the benefit of the doubt.

Off to do some Christmas Shopping, Christmas decorating, and Christmas planning, all in my little 'Socialist' enclave and in plain view of the RA. I love to buck authority!

>>>You were free to contact your SB member at any time.<<<<

When the boundary study was announced to the public? When was that?

How do you know that people didn't contact their school board member at that time? MANY did that, beginning back in the summer. Surely you heard about that during the campaigns. Of course it didn't make any difference. The SB claimed that it was already written in stone, which schools would be considered, no magnets, no moratorium, etc. They put their little FAQ page up on the website long before the first meeting. So obviously many people had contacted their school board member, to no avail.

word Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Make your feelings know to the School Board and
> Staff.
>
> Make sure you point out the obvious problems with
> Option 5:
> 1) No buffer at SL - too many students, there are
> many new housing projects planned for this area.
> 2) Does not address the high growth area
> McNair/Coppermine, lot's of housing projects going
> in here too.
> 3) School Board and Staff are pandering South
> Lakes PTSA, this has got to stop.


Can we add one more to the list?

4) NAVY SHOULD STAY AT CHANTILLY. Why are the Navy kids now going to Chantilly going to be bussed over 7 miles to Oakton in rush hour traffic when Chantilly is no more than 2 or 3 miles from their homes.

No one wants to hear that Navy should be reunited at Oakton - pleeze....

>>>I guess it's too far out of the realm of your perspective regarding the dunce parents of Reston, that we could have ever done something of our own initiative that was actually productive and smart.<<<<

I never said your PTSA board was dumb. Why are you always so defensive?

I don't know about 'productive and smart' as much as 'Stu and staff loved it, it was exactly what they had been waiting for the public to 'discover' as the the 'best' scenario'.

I did not hear one person in this area complain when the South County boundary study did not include under-enrolled schools in the central part of the County. I also didn't hear anyone in this area complain when Mount Vernon was left out of the study. All of a sudden, everyone is asking that the studies be all-inclusive. I can't help it if I find some of these arguments to be a little specious and self-serving.

SL Verity - there's a naive quality to your postings - it actually reflects that you are a caring person that wants folks to get along - but they are naive. First and foremost, if you deign to have people interested in your school, it takes more than just averring it is a "good" school. You have the burden of persuasion, which means carrying both a factual burden and an associated one of credibility (some of which you have done, to be fair). But persuading people to your views is work, is not easy, and requires an understanding of the other side's position and what motivates them. Some of those motivations are honorable, some clearly are not - speak to the honorable ones, with data - and explain how the existing challenges can be ameliorated. Some may not listen - such is life. And conclusory thinking is often fatal to a position.

In this vein, merely stating that people ought to lump it because they elected these officials doesn't address the issue, it only deflects it - it is an abstraction with little substance that means little. Look, if the School Board is not being straight with people (and while I am not conclusive as to this, it sure looks that way), then that is not conduct that reflects principled governance and that is a problem, no matter who and how the members of the Board were elected. And while that doesn't mean that your position is a "wrong one" or that South Lakes should not receive some of the benefits of a redistricting, it seems to be a rather simple observation that if you are perceived to be too close, or in league with those that are not acting in a principled way, you put at peril your credibility, which of course is not helpful to your cause. And don't confuse the credibility factor with self interest - you are certainly entitled to be self interested on this matter, and people should not be surprised if you are - but my comment, take it for what it is - is that dedication to being fair and principled would go a long way to sustain a burden of credibility and persuasion, as difficult as it may be to restrain an impulse to "assist" someone that may have views in opposition to yours.

Is there a link to this "option 5" somewhere on the web?

ITRADE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Is there a link to this "option 5" somewhere on
> the web?


http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/westcoboundary/index.htm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2007 05:34PM by Old Timer.

That shows me options 1-4. I'm still looking for "new" #5.

quantum Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SL Verity - there's a naive quality to your
> postings - it actually reflects that you are a
> caring person that wants folks to get along - but
> they are naive. First and foremost, if you deign
> to have people interested in your school, it takes
> more than just averring it is a "good" school.
> You have the burden of persuasion, which means
> carrying both a factual burden and an associated
> one of credibility (some of which you have done,
> to be fair). But persuading people to your views
> is work, is not easy, and requires an
> understanding of the other side's position and
> what motivates them. Some of those motivations are
> honorable, some clearly are not - speak to the
> honorable ones, with data - and explain how the
> existing challenges can be ameliorated. Some may
> not listen - such is life. And conclusory
> thinking is often fatal to a position.
>
> In this vein, merely stating that people ought to
> lump it because they elected these officials
> doesn't address the issue, it only deflects it -
> it is an abstraction with little substance that
> means little. Look, if the School Board is not
> being straight with people (and while I am not
> conclusive as to this, it sure looks that way),
> then that is not conduct that reflects principled
> governance and that is a problem, no matter who
> and how the members of the Board were elected.
> And while that doesn't mean that your position is
> a "wrong one" or that South Lakes should not
> receive some of the benefits of a redistricting,
> it seems to be a rather simple observation that if
> you are perceived to be too close, or in league
> with those that are not acting in a principled
> way, you put at peril your credibility, which of
> course is not helpful to your cause. And don't
> confuse the credibility factor with self interest
> - you are certainly entitled to be self interested
> on this matter, and people should not be surprised
> if you are - but my comment, take it for what it
> is - is that dedication to being fair and
> principled would go a long way to sustain a burden
> of credibility and persuasion, as difficult as it
> may be to restrain an impulse to "assist" someone
> that may have views in opposition to yours.


Quantum:

I don't want to be too closely linked with FCPS and the Board, largely b/c I am not counting on the "deal" being done...by a long shot. The whole South County example shows that the old "Ain't over til it's over" adage holds true here.

To defend SLVerity, if we could index and footnote earlier posts, it would make it easier. But I contend that SLHS supporters have consistently refrained from attacking other schools and communities, while having to provide -- repeatedly --a great deal of solid information and examples to rebut the strong and grievously errant presumption that the school is a hellhole. And it gets cavalierly dismissed or scoffed at by many posters/opponents.

So it is very frustrating to point out that many SLHS kids go to excellent universities (and give examples and numbers re: where); there is little violence and gang activity at the school; etc. And then have people say "you're dogsh*&" or "you're a loser", "thanks for sending the articulate, good-looking black girl to the meeting, but why won't you send the 'hard cases'", etc.

And then have to state and restate the facts and reality again and again. That's not fair and it reflects the challenge of having to do without being able to say "see Post #345 on Nov. 11 where we detailed the percentage of SLHS applicants accepted at VaTech)".

Hence, you might understand why some of us are almost shocked by FCPS' apparent willingness to consider and actually revise the boundaries based on our comments, and why we are bemused when people allege that we have choreographed this all with FCPS.

Dear Quantum, I am going to take a quantum leap here to say I am most definitely opposed to any suggestion that South Lakes has colluded with, or been too close with, or in any other way compromised itself with regards to this redistricting. That is what I resent.

I have gone out of my way on this board to be solicitous to the feelings and positions of others, and frankly, have not seen the same in kind by many posting here. To be fair and frank, I realize that some in opposition are so only because they don't want change in their lives. I acknowledge that completely. I have merely tried to persuade them that change is not always bad and can sometimes be good. For example, there are probably many parents who don't want to change schools, yet if offered a better job opportunity elsewhere would jump at the chance. Before anyone complains, let me say that I am not equating more substantial income and opportunity with redistricting. But there are many here who would gladly send their child across the County to TJ if given the opportunity, and would not be complaining.

I have also tried to let people know of my positive experiences in this pyramid, and yes, all of my family stayed with it from K-12, as well as two sets of cousins. We were all well-served by the school, though I wish that we had had four years of Bruce Butler, and not two. When we bought our home here 22 years ago, South Lakes was a fine school. Perceptions have changed over time, mainly because we have been surrounded by newer development on almost all sides, and people tend to flock to new development, and that has negatively affected the school and what it is able to offer its students. Some have suggested on this board that we should have moved and that we have gotten what we deserved. That seems spiteful to me. We did not move but decided to give our school a try. Would I like SL to have a better reputation? Of course. Did I bail out when it didn't? No. Did I stay and work to make it so? Yes, and it has made great strides in the last two years. What most concerns me? The falling off of high-level classes because we have only around 1150 general ed students. Does it make me angry when we are surrounded by schools at or over capacity receiving more services for their tax dollar? Yes it does. Have I endorsed adding AP classes to supplement IB, thus making the move easier for incoming families? Yes I have, many times.

Please don't presume to call me naive. I don't really think it is an accurate reflection of my position.

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>School Board and Staff are pandering South
> Lakes PTSA, this has got to stop.<<<<
>
> I really don't think it's pandering to them as
> much as their option was preferred by Stu and he
> has the final say in what happens. Of course Stu
> and the PTSA may have worked on option 5 together.
> I really don't know. But I am sure that staff
> and Stu were happy to see it. Obviously.


As one poster posted, from the notes "Stuart Gibson, FCPS School Board, 7/8/2006 – Crossfield Elementary PTA Meeting:"

However, Mr. Gibson stated early on that it is really just an attempt to boost scores. “Increasing the student population at South Lakes High School with successful, supported students will only help to improve the positive instructional/social environment that already exists at South Lakes High School. School “report card” statistics will also take a significant leap upward with the influx of academically sound students.”

"successful supported students" "academically sound students" --sounds like the "advantaged student" bug whispered in the ear of the South Lakes PTSA.

SL Verity - there's a naive quality to your postings - it actually reflects that you are a caring person that wants folks to get along sounds like the "advantaged student" bug whispered in the ear of the South Lakes PTSA.
So it is very frustrating to point out that many SLHS kids go to excellent universities. Could you please tell us when the public had that opportunity? South Lakes should not receive some of the benefits of a redistricting, it seems to be a rather simple observation that if you are perceived to be too close, or in league with those that are not acting in a principled way. That said, I can sit idle no longer. There are a few facts that I would hope all should have. As SLHS Padre said, there appears to be a vocal minority attempting to stop this process. I truly believe you are mistaken on this one. The fact that the minority has shrunk is merely an outcome of sighs of relief as more and more areas are spared from the proverbial chopping block

When my 9th grader was in 5th and 6th grades at a magnet school, she and her friends, who would be separated for middle school, expected to be together at SLHS after the construction was finished and the friends were redistricted to SLHS.

This redistricting was not a surprise.

ITRADE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That shows me options 1-4. I'm still looking for
> "new" #5.


Come on now. You actually had to read under the map for the ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO. Here's the actual document....

http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/westcoboundary/scenarios/alternativeoption.pdf

noticed that you have a penchant for calling people liars, whenever you don't like what they say. That's not very nice. Why aren't these children taught any writing skills? Why are they unfamiliar with the mechanics of a paragraph? know that I can't change your opinions....alot of you are sticking with the way you feel. Just examine writing patterns a little more carefully and you'll discover you are incorrect. When I'm playing a role, other than that of a bird, it is usually, rather obvious. 1. Redistrict when a new school needs to be populated, or when an old school is being closed.
2. Redistrict when a school projected to be significantly overcrowded is located next to a school that is projected to be to have significant excess capacity. I would estimate that about 5% (I'll be generous and give you 10%) want to go to South Lakes, therefore, the MAJORITY do not want to go.

Didn't see that line - alternative scenario.

Thank you.

Just as a background request from you "old timers," but what is the reason for the existence thus far of the "Madison Island" that exists in Reston?

Thats a mixed area with some very nice houses on one side of Hunter Mill and some "densish" development on the west side of Hunter Mill Road.

ConCerned Step Mother of 2 SL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SL Verity - there's a naive quality to your
> postings - it actually reflects that you are a
> caring person that wants folks to get along sounds
> like the "advantaged student" bug whispered in the
> ear of the South Lakes PTSA.
> So it is very frustrating to point out that many
> SLHS kids go to excellent universities. Could you
> please tell us when the public had that
> opportunity? South Lakes should not receive some
> of the benefits of a redistricting, it seems to be
> a rather simple observation that if you are
> perceived to be too close, or in league with those
> that are not acting in a principled way. That
> said, I can sit idle no longer. There are a few
> facts that I would hope all should have. As SLHS
> Padre said, there appears to be a vocal minority
> attempting to stop this process. I truly believe
> you are mistaken on this one. The fact that the
> minority has shrunk is merely an outcome of sighs
> of relief as more and more areas are spared from
> the proverbial chopping block

I am sorry but I don't get what you are trying to say.

ITRADE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Didn't see that line - alternative scenario.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Just as a background request from you "old
> timers," but what is the reason for the existence
> thus far of the "Madison Island" that exists in
> Reston?
>
> Thats a mixed area with some very nice houses on
> one side of Hunter Mill and some "densish"
> development on the west side of Hunter Mill Road.

The reason that there is a "Madison Island" in the first place is that, when the Hunter Mill Estates subdivision (immediately south of the Toll Road, on the eastern side of Hunter Mill Road, began being built, FCPS (as it was allowed to do, without public hearing, etc.) took that neighborhood out of the Madison HS pyramid, and put it in the SLHS pyramid. Had it been left in the Madison pyramid, there would have been continuous and contiguous boundaries extending northward from the Tamarack and Wayside developments, up through Hunter Mill Estates, and then (crossing the Toll Road), up to the neighborhoods and houses north of the Toll Road. By carving out this piece of Vienna (yes, it is in Vienna mailing address, and is not part of RA, just as are most of the Madison Island homes), the island was created. This happened in 1994, for those of you who are historians among us.

Regardless how great SL HS is, we hereby state that, we will never send any one of our children to SLHS. SLHS kids are great kids. No doubt about that. Unfortunately, SL PTA has no self esteem and deserves no respect. Shame on SL PTA and shameless county officials who causes such hard feeling to SL HS and SLHS kids. That won't work, the rest of the county doesn't want it and Reston does. Under the current plan, having Fair Oaks Estates or Century Oaks or Fair Woods which is part of Navy and Chantilly go to Oakton would be an unconscionable decision of a group of parents from Floris, Fox Mill and Madison. Don't count on that. Most parents don't want IB, if they did then the program would be at some of the better schools, like Langley, Madison, Oakton, McLean, TJ, etc. Parents of college bound kids want AP!!!

ferfux Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Its greatest merit was the taking up again of
> dialectics as the highest form of reasoning. ...incandescent masses of gas in
> various stages of condensation."

------
A quick google search reveals this to be plagiarized wood-for-word from "Frederick Engels Socialism: Utopian and Scientific II [Dialectics]"

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch02.htm

Offensive language is merely rude; plagiarism is against the law.

Madison Island Looks Fishy:

I don't understand the obsession with postal box addresses and RA boundaries when it comes to school boundaries. A huge block of RA property(North Point) goes to Herndon, Hunter Mill Estates is not the only Vienna address to go to South Lakes, Oak Hill kids go to Westfield and Oakton, Oakton kids along Vale road go to Madison, etc., etc. etc.

Forum Reader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ferfux Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "Its greatest merit was the taking up again of
> > dialectics as the highest form of reasoning.
> ...incandescent masses of gas in
> > various stages of condensation."
>

>
> Offensive language is merely rude; plagiarism is
> against the law.


LMAO ooooh if its against the LAW then Prosecute me!!!!!!!!!! Bwhahahahahaha!
IRONIC isnt it that someone should demand OWNERSHIP of something when someone else is QUOTING MARXIST LAW. Hmmm Komerad. Dont we all COLLECTIVLY own EVERYTHING? OR are you a mere lackey to the Capitalist running dog imperialistic Government? Hmmmmmm!??!?!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2007 06:38PM by ferfux.

SLVerity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Madison Island Looks Fishy:
>
> I don't understand the obsession with postal box
> addresses and RA boundaries when it comes to
> school boundaries. A huge block of RA
> property(North Point) goes to Herndon, Hunter Mill
> Estates is not the only Vienna address to go to
> South Lakes, Oak Hill kids go to Westfield and
> Oakton, Oakton kids along Vale road go to Madison,
> etc., etc. etc.

To my knowledge, Hunter Mill Estates is the only Vienna neighborhood that currently goes to South Lakes, maybe there are others.

I don't know what I said that would cause you to use the term "obsession", but it is a fact that that neighborhood, as well as most of the Madison Island, and probably any other Vienna neighborhood that goes to SLHS (you seem to know of some), all attend church and play youth sports in Vienna, not Reston. It takes kids and families out of their established communities to send them to SLHS.

Perhaps your "obsession" with SLHS is the kind of thing that is scaring people away, not the gangs, etc.

That's when many Restoners
moved down the road to herndon and
Chantilly so that their children could go to
Chantilly or Oakton High schools. So there IS some hope for those young families that WANT to move to Reston after all? We don't believe the numerous statements that SL welcomes diversity. You are one of THEM. And, we don't trust you. There are a lot of rentals in McNair, and are inhabited by many children - especially in the low-income apartment units adjacent to the elementary school. safety statistics as stated on the FCPS web site. 21% of the children are not violent, but the number of incidents compared to the number of students comes out to 21%. Dangerous!!!!!!

Mad. Isl. Lks. Fshy. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SLVerity Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Madison Island Looks Fishy:
> >
> > I don't understand the obsession with postal
> box
> > addresses and RA boundaries when it comes to
> > school boundaries. A huge block of RA
> > property(North Point) goes to Herndon, Hunter
> Mill
> > Estates is not the only Vienna address to go to
> > South Lakes, Oak Hill kids go to Westfield and
> > Oakton, Oakton kids along Vale road go to
> Madison,
> > etc., etc. etc.
>
> To my knowledge, Hunter Mill Estates is the only
> Vienna neighborhood that currently goes to South
> Lakes, maybe there are others.
>
> I don't know what I said that would cause you to
> use the term "obsession", but it is a fact that
> that neighborhood, as well as most of the Madison
> Island, and probably any other Vienna neighborhood
> that goes to SLHS (you seem to know of some), all
> attend church and play youth sports in Vienna, not
> Reston. It takes kids and families out of their
> established communities to send them to SLHS.
>
> Perhaps your "obsession" with SLHS is the kind of
> thing that is scaring people away, not the gangs,
> etc.

I was not speaking to you, specifically, but anyone in Hunter Mill Estates could choose to play sports, swim, and pray in Reston, but some don't. If you drive on Lawyers Road heading East, just as you pass the little league field on Twin Branches, the PO box changes to Vienna, yet the area goes to SL. It extends all the way to Difficult Run and includes Hunter's Run, Polo Point, and also extends down Hunter Valley Road to a branch of difficult Run. Includes Regency Forest. Those are all homes with Vienna addresses, yet they attend school in Reston from K-12.

I have attended Church in Vienna, though I live in Reston, but never felt that I had to also educate my children there.

Satellites Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We, Irish, are a quiet, peace loving people. We
> would never use caps to make a point. We NEVER
> lose our tempers.


BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OI! WANKER!

Nearly two years ago, I attended an elementary school PTA meeting at which Kathy Smith was the guest speaker. Rumors were flying, even then, about the upcoming boundary study. Parents peppered Kathy with questions regarding grandfathering, South Lakes safety issues and IB vs. AP - she had no answers what so ever. There were parents who had taken the time to research the academic offerings of South Lakes and Oakton, comparing the IB and AP programs. She was asked then if AP could be added to South Lakes as that might make the transition smoother for many concerned parents and their students.

The School Board was aware even then of the angst this change would cause. They have done nothing to implement anything that might make this change easier. They continue to force the outcome they want without really listening to the concerns of the families (taxpayers) that this will affect. A more professional campaign back then could have gone along way to a smoother transition i.e. saying families would not be split, adding some AP classes to South Lakes.

After looking at the maps and options, it is clear that adding more high schools to the study should have been done. Oakton needs to be filled with students who leave closer to Oakton (look at Madison and Fairfax and yes I know Fairfax City controls Fairfax - but there are students who live outside of the city that could easier add some numbers to Oakton). Centreville could have taken some of Westfields overage. Where the heck is Langley? Let's just spend $7.5 million for a new addition? Next year that $7.5 million might pay some teacher salaries or for programs that might be cut as we face a county and school budget deficit.

Take the imput the staff has received to date, use that info to make better decisions based on that imput and stop the boundary changes for this year. When we do it - let's do it right. ONE TIME.

The County has chosen the last and most important meeting for Dec 19 at Oakton High School. Things don't work out well when a community is split apart. The Reston(r) Association specifies that residents may have a "Holiday Tree" (Tree) provided that such Tree is Forest Green and decorated with fruits and nuts for the birds and squirrels. Report any violators using "The Complaint Form" available at [www.reston.org] It would behoove us all and our children to commit ourselves to being active participants in SL school activities. living in the Floris area for 15 years, and having been moved multiple times at the whim of a reckless School Board, I think that it is time to stop Dean Tistadt, chief operating officer for facilities and transportation services for Fairfax County Public Schools, said the county developed the four plans to show the potential impact to all of the areas studied, but said none of the plans represented a likely solution. He said he would be surprised if one of the options ended up being the county's final proposal.

For those of you who think that delaying this for a year and doing a more comprehensive study will change things, you are incorrect. Two reasons:

1) Why would the same "players" on the board and administration be any more honest then than they are now.

2) Would you assume a more comprehensive study including other attendance areas would be 100% proximity based? WRONG...we would argue about the same things again, "how do we allocate the poor kids fairly" and "I don't want to go there" etc. What other criteria?????

Somehow, the Langley HS district has disappeared from the FCPS redistricting map representing the Western part of the County. Where has it gone? How positively Orwellian to remake the school map as it appears in the minds of the SB members. And those on this board who say we should just shut up about Langley - too bad!

Not sure if any of you saw this link. It was posted on the FCPS site earlier today, and then removed. I guess they didn't want folks to have a couple of days to review, and get even more pissed off.

http://www.fcps.edu/fts/_draft/westcoboundary/townmeeting12-19-07.pdf

SLVerity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>The school board staff does not expect any students
> generated from future Reston development,

I know that Stu is feediing you this nonsense but please recognize it for the disinformation it is and please be very careful because for this to be true it would mean that the School Board staff has engaged in serious fraud.

The School Board staff evaluates every rezoning and other land use application for it potential impact on the County's schools. They use widely recognized demographic projections to estimate the number children the projects will generate at the elementary, middle school and high school level.

Then the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisor expect $10,000 and $100,000 of dollars of proffers from the proponents of these land use applications as a condition of approval of those applications.

If these projections are not reliable then School Board staff is engage in massive multi-million dollar fraud and are headed to directly jail.
____________

Note to forum

Option 5 is not a SL PTSA product but rather the product of a small subgroup of Sl moms, some of whom also happen to be SL PTSA officers who have been less that clear when they are speaking for the PTSA and when they are speaking for themselves as individuals.

This SL parent does not support the Alternative Option (Option 5) and neither do many other Restonians.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2007 09:58PM by Thomas More.

According to Policy 8130.5 (FCPS), not including Langley HS in the redistricting "study" would be a clear violation of said policy and the entire study should be nullified.

I'm baaaack. It's been a nice break. Had to go organize all the soldiers for this war. We South Lakers, apparently, are known for that.

Note to forum:

I have spent a few days checking around about this, and I venture to say that most Restonians, Florisians, Fox Millians, Madisonians, et al. do not support ANY options because MOST of them have no clue or only the vaguest notion that this redistricting is happening at all. MOST of them don't have kids or have kids too young for them to pay attention, or too old and they've moved on. When I alert them, they say, "oh," and their eyes glaze a bit.

I would argue that "many" does note equal "most who know about it."

Proud Parent of honour student Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Regardless how great SL HS is, we hereby state
> that, we will never send any one of our children
> to SLHS. SLHS kids are great kids. No doubt about
> that. Unfortunately, SL PTA has no self esteem and
> deserves no respect. Shame on SL PTA and shameless
> county officials who causes such hard feeling to
> SL HS and SLHS kids. That won't work, the rest of
> the county doesn't want it and Reston does. Under
> the current plan, having Fair Oaks Estates or
> Century Oaks or Fair Woods which is part of Navy
> and Chantilly go to Oakton would be an
> unconscionable decision of a group of parents from
> Floris, Fox Mill and Madison. Don't count on that.
> Most parents don't want IB, if they did then the
> program would be at some of the better schools,
> like Langley, Madison, Oakton, McLean, TJ, etc.
> Parents of college bound kids want AP!!!

Please be advised that lots of SL parents would be happy to see SL return to AP as soon as possible. But we also recognize that our perspective is being ignored by the school administration, the central administration and the small minority of SL parents whose children obtain disproportionate educational resources by participating in IB classes.

I see the legal beavers have been hard at work. "Law is the last refuge of the scoundrel." (My version of Johnson.)

Does everyone plan on attending the next (Dec 19 at Oakton High School),to present a united front? Any ideas on where we could meet inside?

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>1. a travesty of a study
> 2. town meetings where questions are not answered
> 3. opportunity for affected communities to make
> comments that are ignored<<<<
>
> YUP. That sums it up well. A horrible process,
> very destructive.

Neen -

Since I live in Floris, I've been through this about 5 times. It's been like this every time. The meetings are the part of the process where SB/Staff pretend to listen and we pretend to tell them what we really think. Of them, of the process, of the options, ...

My favorite part of the whole charade is the walk of shame when SB/Staff put up the sheets they plan to ignor. We Floris parents cluster around hoping against hope it's not us again this time. Only difference this time around is that it's the South Lakes parents instead of some parents clustering around hoping against hope that it's us again, not Title One school.

And, somehow, people wonder why we don't feel like pretending this time.

SLVerity Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Madison Island Looks Fishy:
>
> I don't understand the obsession with postal box
> addresses and RA boundaries when it comes to
> school boundaries. A huge block of RA
> property(North Point) goes to Herndon, Hunter Mill
> Estates is not the only Vienna address to go to
> South Lakes, Oak Hill kids go to Westfield and
> Oakton, Oakton kids along Vale road go to Madison,
> etc., etc. etc.

Why do you continually fail to make the distinction between a place name with no or amorphous boundaries and your hometown which has had fixed boundaries since 1965.

Why do you and your 23 allies want to perpetuate the partition of your hometown?

Do you hate Reston that much or love it that little?

Floris parent Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not sure if any of you saw this link. It was
> posted on the FCPS site earlier today, and then
> removed. I guess they didn't want folks to have a
> couple of days to review, and get even more pissed
> off.
>
> http://www.fcps.edu/fts/_draft/westcoboundary/town
> meeting12-19-07.pdf


there is at least one error in the slides, so maybe they pulled it, to correct

Tom: I have heard no one who supports South Lakes argue against their home town. In fact, as I have said many times, by supporting South Lakes we DO support our home town. Getting Aldrin and Armstrong coming to South Lakes, as you would like, is an admirable goal. I supported that for 15 years, but the forces against it were indomitable. It would require support from the legislature and from local business, and at least some cooperation from Herndon, which Reston doesn't have. Uniting Reston was not going to happen through this boundary change.

I initially supported getting Armstrong, and at the very least, Aldrin, back. But after reviewing all the information available to me, I realized that the domino effects of doing this would really disrupt a lot of other communities -- more than the current alternative does.

HOWEVER, Here is a scenario I would support, even at this late date (do you think it has a shot?):

Fox Mill and Aldrin to South Lakes. That would mean adding part or all of McNair to Herndon in the short or long run.

1) What would the numbers look like (ignoring, please, SL buffer issues that are in dispute) and 2) How much organized opposition would there from Herndon to having another Title I school (or part thereof) coming to them?

Would there be any support at all for holding off on McNair and having Herndon underenrolled for awhile until Coppermine is built and perhaps Langley could be considered for Herndon? If holding off on McNair meant no reduction at Westfield, would that be ok? Would the idea of a "Floris" island (more than would exist under the alternative) be acceptable?

Would "uniting Reston" or creating a Reston Town or City be feasible even if the schools were not united in it? Couldn't Reston do what Fairfax City does and contract with the county to administer the schools?

In the meantime, the current new alternative meets SOUTH LAKES' needs -- which is the issue at hand.

Neen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>>You were free to contact your SB member at any
> time.<<<<
>
> When the boundary study was announced to the
> public? When was that?
>

The West County Boundary Study was mentioned during the 03/13/2006 School Board Work Session No. 49. During the 07/16/2007 Work Session No. 8, staff presented the scope of the West County study and the School Board concurred. The results of work Session 8 were mentioned at the July 26, 2007 School Board Regular meeting, and in the audio you can hear the schools that were to be included in the study. I can't find any evidence of public comment during the "Presentations to the School Board" for or against the scope of the study at the July 26 or Sept 6 School Board meetings.

The minutes of these meetings can be found at http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/Fairfax/Board.nsf/Public?OpenFrameSet. Finding this data is challenging at best, and in my opinion they need to organize the material in a useful manner. I also intend to actually pay attention to the minutes of future work meetings so that I am not caught uninformed.

>>>That is exactly why the School Board should be as up front as can be about this situation - invariably the truth does come out - and when it does, the School Board, and those in league with change, ought to be able to say, irrespective of the result, we did what we said we would do. And axiomatically don't infer that those that will be unhappy with the process are victims - they are not - as I have said, most everyone's complaints about this school or the other are overblown (although some points have merit) - and my point is that the people affected will not be victims, but rather will be royally pissed off - pissed off enough to boycott with a serious vengeance the actions of the School Board - the distinction between a group being "victimized" and being super pissed off is a significant one, and if that was not made clear, I apologize.<<<

The problem is not that you have not been clear. The problem is, our school board doesn't care. They do not care if you choose something other than their schools for your children. They do not care if taxpayers don't like their closed meetings, their behind-the-scenes deals, and their total lack of transparency in motivations and actions. The reality is, they have no reason to care what citizens think or feel.

If anyone thinks that anyone on staff, or on the school board, read through the 269 pages of comments from the last boundary meeting, much less the 807 pages of comments made directly online, you are delusional. ALL of that effort was a total waste of our time.

We may as well have written to Santa Claus with our wishes.

Clarifier Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tom:

When were you given permission to address me in the familiar?

> I have heard no one who supports South Lakes
> argue against their home town.

Everyone who opposed Option 4 or supported option 5 argues against their hometown if they live in Reston.

> In fact, as I have
> said many times, by supporting South Lakes we DO
> support our home town.

Not when Option 4 is opposed and Option 5 is supported.

> Getting Aldrin and
> Armstrong coming to South Lakes, as you would
> like, is an admirable goal. I supported that for
> 15 years, but the forces against it were
> indomitable.

Says who?

> It would require support from the
> legislature and from local business, and at least
> some cooperation from Herndon, which Reston
> doesn't have.

Arern't you confusing incorporation with redistricting?

> Uniting Reston was not going to
> happen through this boundary change.

Only because Stu promised it wouldn;'t happen in 2003 in violation of school board policy prohibiting such promises and because residents of Reston failed to speak up for Reston and created Option 5 instead.

> I initially supported getting Armstrong, and at
> the very least, Aldrin, back. But after reviewing
> all the information available to me, I realized
> that the domino effects of doing this would really
> disrupt a lot of other communities -- more than
> the current alternative does.

Not really.

> HOWEVER, Here is a scenario I would support, even
> at this late date (do you think it has a shot?):

too late your advocacy of option 5 precludes consideration of this proposal.

> Fox Mill and Aldrin to South Lakes. That would
> mean adding part or all of McNair to Herndon in
> the short or long run.
>
> 1) What would the numbers look like (ignoring,
> please, SL buffer issues that are in dispute

Only the spinmeisters dispute the need for a buffer see my post earlier today on this issue.

) and
> 2) How much organized opposition would there from
> Herndon to having another Title I school (or part
> thereof) coming to them?


Why are you and your allies more concerned with the opposition of Herndon than the opposition within Fox Mill and Floris? Does the HHS PTA have compromising photos?

> Would there be any support at all for holding off
> on McNair and having Herndon underenrolled for
> awhile until Coppermine is built

What?

> and perhaps
> Langley could be considered for Herndon? If
> holding off on McNair meant no reduction at
> Westfield, would that be ok? Would the idea of a
> "Floris" island (more than would exist under the
> alternative) be acceptable?


What floris island?

> Would "uniting Reston" or creating a Reston Town
> or City be feasible even if the schools were not
> united in it? Couldn't Reston do what Fairfax City
> does and contract with the county to administer
> the schools?

Are you conflating incorporation with redistricting again?

> In the meantime, the current new alternative meets
> SOUTH LAKES' needs -- which is the issue at hand.

So did option 4 and several other ideas which you and your allies chose not to support and for which you will be remembered.

Clarifier -
It's my opinion that the western part of this redistricting should be stopped until the Coppermine redistricting occurs. The fact is, no one knows what the elementary boundaries for Floris, McNair, Oak Hill, and Hutchison will be exactly one year after this redistricting goes into effect. Any maps depicting the current boundaries are a sham.

So, one of the key criteria in this study - avoid split feeders to keep communities together - simply cannot be used because no one knows what the elementary school boundaries will be. And, given that the western part of the county is largely filled up, the high school boundaries in play today, and the boundaries of the elementary schools in play year from now, are the boundaries we will have to live with for a very long time.

>>>I can't find any evidence of public comment during the "Presentations to the School Board" for or against the scope of the study at the July 26 or Sept 6 School BoDuring the 07/16/2007 Work Session No. 8, staff presented the scope of the West County study and the School Board concurred. The results of work Session 8 were mentioned at the July 26, 2007 School Board Regular meeting, and in the audio you can hear the schools that were to be included in the study. ard meetings.<<<

Yes, and from July on, people complained to the school board about the scope of the study. I don't see what else the public could have done to effect the scope of the study. The public was not consulted prior to setting the boundaries of the study, options for magnets, etc. There were no community meetings for input from the community. That was their FIRST mistake, although I doubt that the school board sees it that way. They wanted to control it. And why not? Look what happens when they consult community, 269 pages of commentary from the community meeting and 806 pages of online comments. Who needs that when the School Board KNOWS what is best?

>>>However, Mr. Gibson stated early on that it is really just an attempt to boost scores. “Increasing the student population at South Lakes High School with successful, supported students will only help to improve the positive instructional/social environment that already exists at South Lakes High School. School “report card” statistics will also take a significant leap upward with the influx of academically sound students.”
Stuart Gibson, FCPS School Board, 7/8/2006 – Crossfield Elementary PTA Meeting <<<

Good grief, who talks like that? Other than educrats? What is positive instructional/social environment, in plain English? And why does he need students outside of Reston to do that? Why can't South Lakes provide that with the students they have now?

Another Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The West County Boundary Study was mentioned
> during the 03/13/2006 School Board Work Session
> No. 49. During the 07/16/2007 Work Session No. 8,
> staff presented the scope of the West County study
> and the School Board concurred. The results of
> work Session 8 were mentioned at the July 26, 2007
> School Board Regular meeting, and in the audio you
> can hear the schools that were to be included in
> the study. I can't find any evidence of public
> comment during the "Presentations to the School
> Board" for or against the scope of the study at
> the July 26 or Sept 6 School Board meetings.
>
> The minutes of these meetings can be found at
> http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/Fairfax/Board.nsf/Pu
> blic?OpenFrameSet. Finding this data is
> challenging at best, and in my opinion they need
> to organize the material in a useful manner. I
> also intend to actually pay attention to the
> minutes of future work meetings so that I am not
> caught uninformed.

You seriously consider a couple of pages in this mile high pile of paper to be notice of the commencement of this process such that the average voter had a chance to speak to the proper extent of the boundary study area.

You've got to be kidding.

BTW most of FFX gov't public process is an exercise in political theater with the outcome determined in advance not just the school division. Public input is a joke and ignored by the staff and the elected officials.

Tommy: Some Restonians want the association (which Reston is now) to be incorporated. Reston, Inc. They want to have Aldrin and Armstrong, which each have some or mostly Reston addresses, pyramided (redistricted) back into South Lakes. They think this will, ipso facto, help promote a future Reston, Inc. So yes, SOME people conflate incorporation with redistricting. Not I.

WestfieldDad - spot on - excellent point below

"It's my opinion that the western part of this redistricting should be stopped until the Coppermine redistricting occurs. The fact is, no one knows what the elementary boundaries for Floris, McNair, Oak Hill, and Hutchison will be exactly one year after this redistricting goes into effect. Any maps depicting the current boundaries are a sham."

EVERY NON-SOUTH LAKES PARENT NEEDS TO EXPRESS THIS POINT AT THE MEETING AND VIA THE FEEDBACK FORM.

Proud Parent of honour student Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Regardless how great SL HS is, we hereby state
> that, we will never send any one of our children
> to SLHS. SLHS kids are great kids. No doubt about
> that. Unfortunately, SL PTA has no self esteem and
> deserves no respect. Shame on SL PTA and shameless
> county officials who causes such hard feeling to
> SL HS and SLHS kids. That won't work, the rest of
> the county doesn't want it and Reston does.<<<
> Parents of college bound kids want AP!!!<<<

Great post. Thanks. You've said it all. What a shame our school board doesn't care what the citizens want.

The alternatives scenario does not affect the outcome of Coppermine/McNair changes. So South Lakes parents ARE in favor of leaving McNair alone for now. The question of where McNair students, and students now west of Centerville Road (currently in Floris) and new students in new developments go, can be left up to the future.

None of those neighborhoods abuts South Lakes and therefore, South Lakes proximity issues would not be affected by any of those changes, and no one who is affected now would be affected by future changes.

South Lakes has an immediate opening for 700+ students. The first wave will only fill a quarter of that capacity. It will take four years to get to the numbers needed for full course offerings. So the need is NOW and the opportunity is NOW and the kids who move there in the next year will benefit right away from changes in curricula that can be made with the first wave of students.

Remember: There are only a few more than 1,100 general ed kids at SL now. That's 275 per grade. In four years, there should be 450 per grade. That is a significant number for being able to offer the same kinds of courses other schools provide.

>>>Getting Aldrin and Armstrong coming to South Lakes, as you would like, is an admirable goal. I supported that for 15 years, but the forces against it were indomitable. It would require support from the legislature and from local business,<<<

Why would the legislature and business have to support moving those two schools to South Lakes, but not moving students in and out of Oakton, or Chantilly or Westfield?

Your argument is just, well, silly. Business and the state assembly have nothing to do with redistricting South Lakes.

I love Reston -- you can think Option 4 was a horrible option, and still support Reston. Pulling Armstrong out of Herndon and into SLHS doesn't make sense.

Would the Floris parents who oppose the Alternate Scenario have been happy to be moved to Herndon as proposed in Option 4?

So if Reston incorporates as a "town/city/whatever", do we not have the same situation we have with Vienna or or Fairfax where all of the students from these jurisdictions have to attend the designated schools (Madison/Fairfax).

On the other hand... perhaps an Oak Hill "town" is in order.

Clarifier Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tommy:

You're just rude to be a jerk now.

> Some Restonians want the association (which
> Reston is now) to be incorporated. Reston, Inc.

Reston Association is already incorporated. It's a corporation. Incorporation of Reston means making Reston a town or, my preference a city, like the City of Fairfax or Alexandria

> They want to have Aldrin and Armstrong, which each
> have some or mostly Reston addresses, pyramided
> (redistricted) back into South Lakes.

It has nothing to do with postal addresses.

> They think
> this will, ipso facto, help promote a future
> Reston, Inc. So yes, SOME people conflate
> incorporation with redistricting. Not I.

Your postings make clear you confuse many things.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2007 11:36PM by Thomas More.

Clarifier Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The alternatives scenario does not affect the
> outcome of Coppermine/McNair changes. So South
> Lakes parents ARE in favor of leaving McNair alone
> for now.

You and your 24 girlfriends are not all of South Lakes parents no matter how grandiose your delusions.

The question of where McNair students,
> and students now west of Centerville Road
> (currently in Floris) and new students in new
> developments go, can be left up to the future.

Its already been decided.

> None of those neighborhoods abuts South Lakes and
> therefore, South Lakes proximity issues would not
> be affected by any of those changes, and no one
> who is affected now would be affected by future
> changes.

Dogwood abuts McNair. Was Dogwood suddenly redistricted to Langley?

> South Lakes has an immediate opening for 700+
> students.

And we've had that opening for 7 years, what difference will another year make?

The first wave will only fill a quarter
> of that capacity. It will take four years to get
> to the numbers needed for full course offerings.
> So the need is NOW and the opportunity is NOW and
> the kids who move there in the next year will
> benefit right away from changes in curricula that
> can be made with the first wave of students.
>
> Remember: There are only a few more than 1,100
> general ed kids at SL now. That's 275 per grade.
> In four years, there should be 450 per grade. That
> is a significant number for being able to offer
> the same kinds of courses other schools provide.

Not if all the new teachers are used to satisfy the IB minimum class requirements from Zurich.

Hey, weren't you the one who didn't want the College Board deciding SL's curriculum. Why is it ok for some gnomes from Zurich to make those choices for SL so that we have to have classes with 15 kids in them but Business Law isn't offered when 18 kids sign up for the class?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/17/2007 11:45PM by Thomas More.

The school board could learn a few things from American Idol.

Restonian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I love Reston -- you can think Option 4 was a
> horrible option, and still support Reston.
> Pulling Armstrong out of Herndon and into SLHS
> doesn't make sense.

Why?

> Would the Floris parents who oppose the Alternate
> Scenario have been happy to be moved to Herndon as
> proposed in Option 4?

Why not its closer to them than SL and just as good as SL.

word Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So if Reston incorporates as a
> "town/city/whatever", do we not have the same
> situation we have with Vienna or or Fairfax where
> all of the students from these jurisdictions have
> to attend the designated schools
> (Madison/Fairfax).

that's reason you'll never see a high school attendance boundary down the middle of Elden street, Maple Street or Main Street.

> On the other hand... perhaps an Oak Hill "town" is
> in order.

Good luck with that.

>>>Option 5 is not a SL PTSA product but rather the product of a small subgroup of Sl moms, some of whom also happen to be SL PTSA officers who have been less that clear when they are speaking for the PTSA and when they are speaking for themselves as individuals.<<<

Thank you for clarifying. (Pardon the expression.)

Thomasino: Nothing short of forcing Aldrin and Armstrong into South Lakes and making Reston a Shining City on the Hill will do for you. Anything less is beyond discussion.

(If calling you by a sweet diminutive diminishes you, I think you need to spend a spot of time in a birdhouse. She'll give you some ego-boosting seeds to munch on.)

>>>According to Policy 8130.5 (FCPS),<<<

THERE's a policy needs to be scrapped or at least rewritten. But I'm not sure if that is allowed under strategic Governance. I suppose that's up to Jack Dale, just like everything else under Strategic Governance/

>>>You and your 24 girlfriends are not all of South Lakes parents no matter how grandiose your delusions.<<<

24? THAT many? I thought it was closer to 4, with our own Clarifier being a self identified SL mom, rather than a geographically assigned one. Too bad her neighborhood still wasn't chosen to be within the South Lakes boundaries. How disappointing that must be for her! While neighbors are breathing a HUGE sigh of relief. So far.

Clarifier Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thomasino:

I'm not Italian either. That would be Aquinas

Nothing short of forcing Aldrin and
> Armstrong into South Lakes and making Reston a
> Shining City on the Hill will do for you. Anything
> less is beyond discussion.

Actually a review of my earlier posts would reveal a Fox Mill+Aldrin was advocated by this humble servant.

> (If calling you by a sweet diminutive diminishes
> you, I think you need to spend a spot of time in a
> birdhouse. She'll give you some ego-boosting seeds
> to munch on.)

Save the disrepectful derision for someone who appreciates it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2007 12:11AM by Thomas More.

Clarifier said:

>>>making Reston a Shining City on the Hill<<<

And you don't want that? I thought that most people in Reston wanted that. No?

Oops, sorry, I forgot. You don't live in Reston.

Nevermind.