Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Herndon High is on the northern edge of it's
> attendance area which reaches to McNair and
> Coates(?).

Just bits of Coates and McNair go to Herndon, most of the kids go to Westfield.

>
> Extend Herndon's attendance area north where it
> was in the 80s when it included Forestville and
> Great Falls, then the school is in the middle of
> its attendance area.
>

I exchanged email with Janie during the SL redistricting. Janie said it would be horrible for the Forestville/Great Falls kids to be redistricted since they had been redistricted as recently as 1990 or so. That to a Florisite who had been through about 8 in the same timeframe and was also up for the Coates redistricting the next year.

>
> Most Floris parents would be happy back at
> Westfields.
>

This is true, but, mostly we'd like to be left the hell alone for once.

>
> > The problem is using statistics to cover up poor
> performance.<
>
> Agreed. One of the few good aspects of NCLB is
> that it forces localities to disaggregate
> achievement by demographic subgroups so that Dale
> can't use IB, GT centers and other tricks to cover
> up FCPS's ongoing failure to enable minorities to
> achieve at levels attained by poorer school
> divisions in Virginia with larger minority
> populations. That should be an indictable
> offense.

Agreed on the tricks, especially given variation in programs between the schools like AP/IB where the program you get depends on where you live.

By the way, as long as you are going after Brown, AP/IB availability by HS SES ought to be near the top of the list of obvious offenses.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You left out F/RL and LEP as a metric to adjust
> for.

The preference among county residents for neighborhood schools rather than gerry-mandered boundaries or a lottery system where students are assigned to schools based on their race, parental income level and English-speaking ability is overwhelming. No school board or school board candidate in Fairfax County will support what you favor. If you think otherwise, you should change your monikor to Thomas Moron.


> Big surprise, you want to dismiss 50 years of
> established Constitutional Law that is still in
> full force and effect. Given your ideologically
> induced blindness to the obvious, I expected
> nothing else.

No, it's you who wants to interpret the current law as you see fit. The current system in Fairfax would certainly be upheld if challenged in court. Any black student who moves into Great Falls can attend Langley, just as any Hispanic student who moves into Mantua can attend Woodson. If the current boundaries were as vulnerable to a challenge as you suggest, they would have been overturned already, liberals in Arlington (where I guess you'd call Yorktown the "white school," W-L the "Hispanic school" and Wakefield the "black school") would have successfully challenged the ACPS boundaries, and similar challenges would have taken place in Montgomery (where the demographics of Whitman or Churchill bear little resemblance to those at Einstein or Kennedy). If anything, given the development of the case law, what would now be subject to intense scrutiny would be the type of race-based assignments you propose.
>
> Some places have, but Langley has always been
> almost lily white and all rich.

"Lily white" is a racist phrase that, in any event, does not accurately describe Langley, which has a substantial and growing percentage of Asian students. I expect you call high-achieving black students "oreos," too.


> Then, you are knowingly associating your self with
> the positions, attitudes and ideology of the
> coiner of the phrase. Again, not surprised.

Nope. I won't allow either George Wallace or you to define the English language for me. I think the phrase "social engineering" fairly accurately describes what you've proposed. Support for neighborhood schools, combined with rational transportation planning, is what Westfield Dad, I and others have suggested ought to be taking place.

>
> But you sell your fellow Fairfax County citizens
> short: for in every forum where the demographic
> summary of the FCPS high schools has been
> distributed, there has been an audible gasp of
> shock and surprise.

I very much doubt it, since the information is readily available. Perhaps you only consort with equally uninformed types.
>
> Your fellow citizens know a wrong when they see
> it. Too bad you don't.

> W.T. Woodson and Harry F. Byrd said the same thing
> and they were just as wrong.
>
> We know the stripes you wear. Don't waste anymore
> of our time or Cary's server space, spewing you
> thoughts.

You're very quick to imply others are racist, when they don't embrace your proposals for a massive county-wide redistricting that, if implemented as you propose, would result in even more gerry-mandered boundaries than currently exist, or some type of race and income-based lottery system. The type of system you propose would, in relatively short order, be shown to fail to achieve its intended objectives, no matter how laudible those objective might appear to be to an arm-chair observer. This thread is getting longer by the day, and I've yet to see one other poster who supports what you propose. At most, people seem to have an issue with the Langley boundaries and the unfairness of having excluded Langley from the South Lakes redistricting in 2008. There is no inconsistency, however, between embracing the concept of neighborhood schools and objecting to boundaries that require the county to bus certain students 15 miles or so to a high school when other schools are closer to their homes.

If you truly believe your views are held by most county residents, I encourage you to toss your hat into the ring and run for School Board yourself. I fully expect you'd receive at least one write-in vote.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2011 10:36AM by Mozart.

Thomas More -

The schools are not some social experiment designed to rectify all of societies disparities. Since the dawn of time, there has been rich and poor, motivated and lazy, success and failure. There's always been a rich neighborhood and poor. Changing school boundaries is not going to fix any of that.

why not just skip straight to re-distribution of wealth? You are seeking to eliminate the freedom to associate with people of like income and choices, as represented by property values adn community schools. There is no legal impediment to living in whatever neighborhood one chooses. If you want to move into Langley or McLean or wherever, the only limitation is your capabilities and motivation to work for that outcome and be able to afford housing in those areas.

And FCPS actually makes it easier still - your child can attend any school in the county. You just have to bear the cost transportation.

facts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thomas More -
>
> The schools are not some social experiment designed to rectify all of societies disparities. Since the dawn of time, there has been rich and poor, motivated and lazy, success and failure. There's always been a rich neighborhood and poor. Changing school boundaries is not going to fix any of that.

> why not just skip straight to re-distribution of wealth? You are seeking to eliminate the freedom to associate with people of like income and choices, as represented by property values adn community schools. There is no legal impediment to living in whatever neighborhood one chooses. If you want to move into Langley or McLean or wherever, the only limitation is your capabilities and motivation to work for that outcome and be able to afford housing in those areas.<

You do know that Fountainhead is fiction, right? And that its author was a sociopath?

You also know our country has been redistributing its wealth toward the wealthy for the last 30 years, right?

Exactly the same arguments as yours were used by Wallace, Maddox's and their allies to oppose all of the civil rights legislation in the 60's. They lost then too.

At least try an argument that's original.

> And FCPS actually makes it easier still - your child can attend any school in the county. You just have to bear the cost transportation.<

Actually, not. You have to have a justification to transfer and are limited in the choices. Ask parents who want to get away from IB. Given capacity and safety constraints not all 48,000 high school kids can go to Langley, even if they drive themselves.

Otherwise, all the best athletes in sport would play for the high school with the most successful coach, among other phenomena.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Otherwise, all the best athletes in sport would
> play for the high school with the most successful
> coach, among other phenomena.

This is what Thomas More really cares about. He's upset that South Lakes had a declining enrollment until a few years ago and its sports teams weren't good.

You'd think that he's STFU now that they are slightly better, but no such luck.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You do know that Fountainhead is fiction, right?
> And that its author was a sociopath?

I think you are thinking about Atlas Shrugged, but whatever. And we have a long history of our 'idea' people, both left and right, being less than perfect people. And you are for the collective, I suppose?

>
> You also know our country has been redistributing
> its wealth toward the wealthy for the last 30
> years, right?

I think the world has become ruthlessly efficient in the last 30 years in sorting out winners and losers. Education is the key to coming out on top. While the rest of world embraces that with vigour, you argue about the racial makeup of high schools. Worry about your own success, your children's success - not what some other person has or has not. Envy can lead to great unhappiness.



>
> Exactly the same arguments as yours were used by
> Wallace, Maddox's and their allies to oppose all
> of the civil rights legislation in the 60's. They
> lost then too.

Then there were legal restrictions on people buying property, attending schools, etc. None of that exists today. In fact, we've now had 40+ years of legalized reverse discrimination, which while creating a very small and distinct class of successful minorities (e.g., Obama, Holder) has done largely nothing for it's supposed beneficiaries.

>
> At least try an argument that's original.
>
> > And FCPS actually makes it easier still - your
> child can attend any school in the county. You
> just have to bear the cost transportation.<
>
> Actually, not. You have to have a justification
> to transfer and are limited in the choices. Ask
> parents who want to get away from IB. Given
> capacity and safety constraints not all 48,000
> high school kids can go to Langley, even if they
> drive themselves.
>

Why don't you just move the Langley attendance zone if you think it's so great? I can tell you the grass is no greener here.

> Otherwise, all the best athletes in sport would
> play for the high school with the most successful
> coach, among other phenomena.

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thomas More Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You left out F/RL and LEP as a metric to adjust
> > for.
>
> The preference among county residents for neighborhood schools rather than a lottery system where students are assigned to schools based on their race, parental income level and English-speaking ability is overwhelming.<

No one mentioned a lottery until you just did. It's not proposed and not necessary. Simply moving boundaries should fix most of it.

> No school board or school board candidate in Fairfax County will support what you favor.<

They may not have a choice. They certainly cannot defend the status quo or the decision to build South County ahead of renovating existing majority minority schools in light of these metrics.

> If you think otherwise, you should change your monikor to Thomas Moron.<

Isn't there some aphorism that the first person to descend to name calling loses?

> No, it's you who wants to interpret the current law as you see fit.<

I have case law. Other than you attitude, what have you got.

> The current system in Fairfax would certainly be upheld if challenged in court.<

Based on what court precedent.

> Any black student who moves into Great Falls can attend Langley, just as any Hispanic student who moves into Mantua can attend Woodson. If the current boundaries were as vulnerable to a challenge as you suggest, they would have been overturned already,<

Like all FCPS information, bad news isn't widely disseminated.

> liberals in Arlington (where I guess you'd call Yorktown the "white school," W-L the "Hispanic school" and Wakefield the "black school") would have successfully challenged the ACPS boundaries, and similar challenges would have taken place in Montgomery (where the demographics of Whitman or Churchill bear little resemblance to those at Einstein or Kennedy). If anything, given the development of the case law, what would now be subject to intense scrutiny would be the type of race-based assignments you propose.<

Not being familiar with the actual numbers in Arlington, I'm loath to comment.

Only individual student assignments based on race have been questioned & limited by the courts, not neighborhood redistricting which has been upheld and imposed by the courts. That's what FCPS needs to do.

> "Lily white" is a racist phrase<

Other than the intellectual descendants of Nathan Bedford Forest and yourself, who would make such a foolish assertion?

> that, in any event, does not accurately describe Langley, which has a substantial and growing percentage of Asian students.<

When the rest of FCPS high schools are 45% white and Langley is 73% white, with almost no African-Americans or Hispanics, it's a fair description to convey the disproportionate ethnic distribution of that school and 5 or 6 others.

However, if there's a better phrase to quickly convey the phenomenon, feel free to suggest it.

> I expect you call high-achieving black students "oreos," too.<

No, that term was (is?) used by African-Americans to criticize sycophantic members of their ethnic group, especially those who tried to curry favor with white authority figures.

> Nope. I won't allow either George Wallace or you to define the English language for me.<

Phrases acquire connotations and associations. Ignore them at the peril of your credibility.

> Support for neighborhood schools, combined with rational transportation planning, is what Westfield Dad, I and others have suggested ought to be taking place.<

What neighborhood is 17 miles long and 6 miles wide? There isn't any. Our high school and middle school attendance areas (and I'm only talking about secondary schools here) assemble multiple neighborhoods to create their boundaries.

As an amendment to the recent SW elementary redistricting demonstrated, even our elementary school boundaries are assemblages of neighborhoods.

The defense of "neighborhood" schools in a community with a segregated housing pattern was a hallmark of the opponents of Brown throughout the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s.

It failed then and would now.

> I very much doubt it, since the information is readily available.<

But not aggregated into one document as was recently done. That's how the starkness of the disparities became clear and undebatable.

> You're very quick to imply others are racist,<

No, when others rely on the arguments of known segregationist, even after the association is pointed out, they make implication themselves.

> would result in even more gerry-mandered boundaries than currently exist,<

If you noticed there is actually a pairing of several majority white school attendance areas next to abutting attendance areas of majority minority schools. Not a tough fix.

> some type of race and income-based lottery system.<

Nope, never suggested that. It's probably unnecessary to get each high school closed to the median.

> The type of system you propose would, in relatively short order, would be shown to fail to achieve its intended objectives.<

That assertion is based on what exactly?

> This thread is getting longer by the day, and I've yet to see one other poster who supports what you propose.<

Again with the "majority rules" nonsense. This is about Constitutional rights.

> At most, people seem to have an issue with the Langley boundaries and the unfairness of having excluded Langley from the South Lakes redistricting in 2008.<

That's a start. How about building South County Junior and Senior way ahead of the queue so Lorton (nka Laurel Hill) kids wouldn't have to go to Mount Vernon and Hayfield which had capacity.

> There is no inconsistency, however, between embracing the concept of neighborhood schools and objecting to boundaries that require the county to bus certain students 15 miles or so to a high school when other schools are closer to their homes.<

And there are legitimate reason that elementary kids should go to their nearest school, even if their neighborhood doesn't reflect the demographics of the entire County.

Oh, my God, dialogue and agreement. Who'd a thunk that?

> If you truly believe your views are held by most county residents, I encourage you to toss your hat into the ring and run for School Board yourself.<

I have more effective means to these ends.

> I fully expect you'd receive at least one write-in vote.<

I've actually been asked to run multiple times. So it might be a few more than 1.

> Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------
> > Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------
> > "Lily white" is a racist phrase
>
> Other than the intellectual descendants of Nathan
> Bedford Forest and yourself, who would make such a
> foolish assertion?

This Shopper's shopper would...

facts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thomas More Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > You do know that Fountainhead is fiction right?
> > And that its author was a sociopath?
>
> I think you are thinking about Atlas Shrugged, but whatever. And we have a long history of our 'idea' people, both left and right, being less than perfect people. And you are for the collective, I suppose?<

Plato, Aristole, Augustine, Aquinas, Samuelson and others were well adjusted as far as we know.

Crazy people come up with crazy ideas to justify their craziness.

Rand was batshit crazy.

> I think the world has become ruthlessly efficient in the last 30 years in sorting out winners and losers. Education is the key to coming out on top. While the rest of world embraces that with vigour, you argue about the racial makeup of high schools. Worry about your own success, your children's success - not what some other person has or has not. Envy can lead to great unhappiness.<

Tha's definitely Fountainhead.

There you have it, ladies and gentleman, the entire Randian screed.

If you think the rest of the world supports that philosophy you're traveling in ever smaller circle.

And, of course, facts here is a winner whose current standard of living is solely the product of his individual effort.

I'm making popcorn, putting the feet up. I've seen this movie before. There are several belly laughs ahead.

> Then there were legal restrictions on people buying property, attending schools, etc. None of that exists today.<

You're confusing de facto and de jure. Both are unconstitutional.

> In fact, we've now had 40+ years of legalized reverse discrimination, which while creating a very small and distinct class of successful minorities (e.g., Obama, Holder) has done largely nothing for it's supposed beneficiaries.<

As if we didn't see this coming. Come on, get it all out.

What job, school, scholarship, team roaster spot did you lose? What ethnic minority got it instead?

> Why don't you just move the Langley attendance zone if you think it's so great? I can tell you the grass is no greener here.<

I'm happier in a diverse community that resembles the rest of the known world.

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Thomas More Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> > > Mozart Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> > > "Lily white" is a racist phrase
> >
> > Other than the intellectual descendants of
> Nathan
> > Bedford Forest and yourself, who would make such
> a
> > foolish assertion?
>
> This Shopper's shopper would...


Damn, where you been. Haven't seen a post from you in 3 years?

Clever editing.

You left out the part where I invited the suggestion of an alternate phrase that quickly conveyed the situation. got one?

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> facts Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Thomas More Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > > You do know that Fountainhead is fiction
> right?
> > > And that its author was a sociopath?
> >
> > I think you are thinking about Atlas Shrugged,
> but whatever. And we have a long history of our
> 'idea' people, both left and right, being less
> than perfect people. And you are for the
> collective, I suppose?<
>
> Plato, Aristole, Augustine, Aquinas, Samuelson and
> others were well adjusted as far as we know.
>
> Crazy people come up with crazy ideas to justify
> their craziness.
>
> Rand was batshit crazy.
>
> > I think the world has become ruthlessly
> efficient in the last 30 years in sorting out
> winners and losers. Education is the key to
> coming out on top. While the rest of world
> embraces that with vigour, you argue about the
> racial makeup of high schools. Worry about your
> own success, your children's success - not what
> some other person has or has not. Envy can lead
> to great unhappiness.<
>
> Tha's definitely Fountainhead.
>
> There you have it, ladies and gentleman, the
> entire Randian screed.
>
> If you think the rest of the world supports that
> philosophy you're traveling in ever smaller
> circle.
>
> And, of course, facts here is a winner whose
> current standard of living is solely the product
> of his individual effort.
>
> I'm making popcorn, putting the feet up. I've
> seen this movie before. There are several belly
> laughs ahead.
>
> > Then there were legal restrictions on people
> buying property, attending schools, etc. None of
> that exists today.<
>
> You're confusing de facto and de jure. Both are
> unconstitutional.
>
> > In fact, we've now had 40+ years of legalized
> reverse discrimination, which while creating a
> very small and distinct class of successful
> minorities (e.g., Obama, Holder) has done largely
> nothing for it's supposed beneficiaries.<
>
> As if we didn't see this coming. Come on, get it
> all out.
>
> What job, school, scholarship, team roaster spot
> did you lose? What ethnic minority got it
> instead?
>
> > Why don't you just move the Langley attendance
> zone if you think it's so great? I can tell you
> the grass is no greener here.<
>
> I'm happier in a diverse community that resembles
> the rest of the known world.


You've given up winning the argument so you resort to ridicule. Playing to type, sadly.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > Thomas More Wrote:
> >
> -------------------------------------------------
> > > > Mozart Wrote:
> >
> -------------------------------------------------
> > > > "Lily white" is a racist phrase
> > >
> > > Other than the intellectual descendants of
> > Nathan
> > > Bedford Forest and yourself, who would make
> such
> > a
> > > foolish assertion?
> >
> > This Shopper's shopper would...
>
>
> Damn, where you been. Haven't seen a post from
> you in 3 years?
>
> Clever editing.
>
> You left out the part where I invited the
> suggestion of an alternate phrase that quickly
> conveyed the situation. got one?


Your question was specifically aimed at one particular independent clause; I simply answered it.

Currently hunting Taliban in Helmand Province. You?

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your question was specifically aimed at one particular independent clause; I simply answered it.<

Weren't you the one who wrote never criticize without offering a solution?

Don't leave me hanging.

> Currently hunting Taliban in Helmand Province.<

Seriously!? The IQ of Helmand Province and this thread just quintupled.

> You?

Doing battle with the FFX School Board. Much easier stuff. 9 of 12 won't be back in January '12. Including his craveness!!

Progress!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2011 12:38PM by Thomas More.

facts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You've given up winning the argument so you resort to ridicule. Playing to type, sadly.

That's it!

That's all you got.

Ridicule is a generally recognized, very effective form of argument. Scalia uses it all the time.

Victory is mine!!!!!!!!!

By TKO in the 3rd.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2011 12:42PM by Thomas More.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Your question was specifically aimed at one
> particular independent clause; I simply answered
> it.<
>
> Weren't you the one who wrote never criticize
> without offering a solution?

I wouldn't be the only one.

> Don't leave me hanging.

You seek wisdom?

> > Currently hunting Taliban in Helmand Province.<
>
> Seriously!? The IQ of Helmand Province and this
> thread just quintupled.

Pshaw!

> > You?
>
> Doing battle with the FFX School Board. Much
> easier stuff. 9 of 12 won't be back in January
> '12. Including his craveness!!
>
> Progress!!

Term limits would complete your victory.

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Don't leave me hanging.
>
> You seek wisdom?

Still hanging, here.

> Term limits would complete your victory.<

Nah, then we couldn't wear out the good ones to exhaustion



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/03/2011 12:46PM by Thomas More.

Thomas More - I agree with your interpretation of Brown and its progeny. And I think you are absolutely correct to point out that the so-called progressives on the School Board (as well as the educational establishment) would greatly fear any legal action premised on Brown and its progeny.

But I do differ with you as to the potential outcome of any such action today. The current factual predicates are just so much different than they were in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's. Vast numbers of Asians (a broad term, to be sure) and Hispanics (another broad term) have moved into the County, and as others have pointed out, they have caused the schools to be in an ever changing state of flux. And these minority groups, while certainly facing discrimination here and there, have not been not victims of state sponsored discrimination in the way that Blacks were in the Commonwealth. I say this not to be argumentative with your views of Brown and its progeny, but merely to point out that the facts and ever changing demographics would make for a far different suit, than, let's say, the one in Warren County in the 60's, where the discrimination was so readily manifest that in hindsight one wonders how we ever countenanced such a regime as a civil society.

And moreover, it is difficult to buy off on the assertion that merely having black children attend "white" schools would improve their academic performance. In fact, what bothers me about the FCPS is that they don't engage in enough segregation - although I certainly don't mean this in the traditionally negative way and it shouldn't be taken as such. Minority scores in Fairfax suffer in comparison to those in Richmond, the Tidewater area and the like. Clearly these other Virginia districts are teaching to the test, but there is some benefit to repetitive drill in terms of mastering basic computational and reading skills (although I will it to the education professionals to state how inefficient teaching to the test may be). My guess is that Fairfax doesn't do this, as the capable students pass SOL's more or less by osmosis and demand more interesting instruction, and that implementing the kind of tracking required to build basic skills would cause a certain amount of in-school segregation and stigmatization, and no one wants to deal with that problem, seeing it as a greater sin than the achievement gap. But clearly something should be done, and redistricting in and of itself, whatever its legal appeal, seems to be an ineffective means to close the achievement gap. Clearly the experiences of TC Williams, written about so poignantly over the years by Patrick Welsh, undermines the notion that merely integrating a school leads to improved minority performance. Whether one disagrees with her or not, I applaud people like Maria Allen for being so open about attacking the problem. That kind of openness, rather than a legal process, is the kind of thing that we need.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> facts Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You've given up winning the argument so you
> resort to ridicule. Playing to type, sadly.
>
> That's it!
>
> That's all you got.
>
> Ridicule is a generally recognized, very effective
> form of argument. Scalia uses it all the time.
>
> Victory is mine!!!!!!!!!
>
> By TKO in the 3rd.

Hah. Amusing if nothing else.

You are looking for some vast conspiracy in FCPS to discriminate against minorities and it's not there. FCPS is bureaucratic, heartless, incompetent, and a number of other things, but they are not discriminating against minorities in any sort of systematic way. If anything, the Title 1 regulations assure that for the purposes of funding those schools are treated BETTER than your so called 'white' schools. That's not to say that the SB and administration are in any way effective or couldn't be doing a vastly better job across all the FCPS population. I think they should be removed branch and root. But discrimination - not hardly.

In fact, if you did a FCPS-wide redistricting, the number of Title 1 schools would decline, since it would have the (presumed) effect of evening out those populations across all schools. Title 1 now at least forces FCPS to do something about your 'minority' schools - you don't think FCPS would like to eliminate that if they could?

Very few programs over the last 40 years have been effective at addressing poverty and poor education in minority groups. I think you are looking for a silver bullet with a redistricting (which is actually a different way of busing when you think about it) and it just won't work. Like it or not, NCLB at least forced FCPS and it's fellow suburban districts to report on what they always were able to hide before - low minority achievement. The fix for that problem remains undefined.

lets keep it civil Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thomas More - I agree with your interpretation of Brown and its progeny. And I think you are absolutely correct to point out that the so-called progressives on the School Board (as well as the educational establishment) would greatly fear any legal action premised on Brown and its progeny.<

Nice to have a grown-up join the thread.

It's not just the progressives who recognize the implications of the current situation.

> But I do differ with you as to the potential outcome of any such action today. The current factual predicates are just so much different than they were in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's.<

There are differences but many similarities.

Building South County for its majority white rich population when there was capacity at Mount Vernon and Hayfield and justifying it, as Storch did, on the length of the bus ride (8 miles when Langley is 17) which delayed renovationof majority minority schools gets us well past the bar for judicial intervention.

Putting the addition on Langley instead of moving mostly white, mostly rich Great Falls and Forestville kids back to Herndon which further delayed the renovation of majority minority schools adds to the case.

That's just examples that come readily to mind. A little scratching will get more.

> Vast numbers of Asians (a broad term, to be sure) and Hispanics (another broad term) have moved into the County, and as others have pointed out, they have caused the schools to be in an ever changing state of flux. And these minority groups, while certainly facing discrimination here and there, have not been not victims of state sponsored discrimination in the way that Blacks were in the Commonwealth.<

Again, the difference between de jure and de facto. Disparate impact gets judicial intervention.

> I say this not to be argumentative with your views of Brown and its progeny, but merely to point out that the facts and ever changing demographics would make for a far different suit, than, let's say, the one in Warren County in the 60's, where the discrimination was so readily manifest that in hindsight one wonders how we ever countenanced such a regime as a civil society.<

Warren County was a de jure regime.

> And moreover, it is difficult to buy off on the assertion that merely having black children attend "white" schools would improve their academic performance.<

But peer reviewed research does demonstrate such an effect.

> In fact, what bothers me about the FCPS is that they don't engage in enough segregation - although I certainly don't mean this in the traditionally negative way and it shouldn't be taken as such. Minority scores in Fairfax suffer in comparison to those in Richmond, the Tidewater area and the like.<

And Richmond et al are all African-American or nearly so. What are they doing better than FCPS?

> Clearly these other Virginia districts are teaching to the test, but there is some benefit to repetitive drill in terms of mastering basic computational and reading skills<

At a rote level sure. Not in high school.

> (although I will it to the education professionals to state how inefficient teaching to the test may be). My guess is that Fairfax doesn't do this, as the capable students pass SOL's more or less by osmosis and demand more interesting instruction, and that implementing the kind of tracking required to build basic skills would cause a certain amount of in-school segregation and stigmatization, and no one wants to deal with that problem, seeing it as a greater sin than the achievement gap.<

Stuart gets good minority achievement without rote instruction.

> But clearly something should be done, and redistricting in and of itself, whatever its legal appeal, seems to be an ineffective means to close the achievement gap. Clearly the experiences of TC Williams, written about so poignantly over the years by Patrick Welsh, undermines the notion that merely integrating a school leads to improved minority performance. Whether one disagrees with her or not, I applaud people like Maria Allen for being so open about attacking the problem. That kind of openness, rather than a legal process, is the kind of thing that we need.<

Desegregation of FCPS high schools doesn't have to be legal, involve busing across the County or lotteries. Simply redrawing boundaries can do most of the work.

Identifiably "white schools" get more resources and more desirable teachers and other personnel than identifiably minority schools. Its been demonstrated in case after case. Won't have to even offer proof of that in court.

FCPS is a minority majority division. If that had been attuned to it implications, there never would have been the South County or Langley addition scams.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > > Don't leave me hanging.
> >
> > You seek wisdom?
>
> Still hanging, here.
>
> > Term limits would complete your victory.<
>
> Nah, then we couldn't wear out the good ones to
> exhaustion


But there'd be plenty of good ones to replace them. Amplified participation vice cronyism, in accordance with democratic ideals, yes?

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But there'd be plenty of good ones to replace
> them.

Its actually really hard to find good candidates to run for office as my experience over the past year has demonstrated to me again,

> Amplified participation vice cronyism, in accordance with democratic ideals, yes?<

Huh?

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > But there'd be plenty of good ones to replace
> > them.
>
> Its actually really hard to find good candidates
> to run for office as my experience over the past
> year has demonstrated to me again,
>
> > Amplified participation vice cronyism, in
> accordance with democratic ideals, yes?<
>
> Huh?

I mangled that one, my apologies, distracted here. What I meant to say is that term limits would result in more people directly participating as elected officials, and would likely generate more ideas in dealing with various issues. Risk of stagnation would also be mitigated.

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I mangled that one, my apologies, distracted here. What I meant to say is that term limits would result in more people directly participating as elected officials, and would likely generate more ideas in dealing with various issues. Risk of stagnation would also be mitigated.<

Right now, we have 7 openings on the SB this November and finding worthwhile contestants for both parties for all 12 seats in November has been a class A pain in the butt.

If officeholders are term limited, more power flows to the Administrator or Executive who has been in place longer; knows the ropes better; and just waits the reformer out for the term limits to remove them.

I suppose it's good that Thomas More knows there are 12 School Board members. That apparently gives him a leg up on Liz Bradsher.

In terms of his proposals to redistrict FCPS schools to ensure that every middle and high school has specified percentages of whites and non-white students, his claims that such changes are required by "Brown and its progeny" are just wrong.

FCPS has long been considered a "unitary" school system, so any race-based redistricting could not be justified as necessary to address past injustices, and instead would be subject to strict scrutiny under the Constitution. The Supreme Court's latest school decisions - such as Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District (2007), indicate that the types of proposals favored by Thomas More would be invalidated.

In that decision, the Supreme Court said "the Constitution is not violated by racial imbalance in the schools, without more," and "racial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake." It also specific rejected the claim that race-based assignments were necessary to "ensure that racially concentrated housing patterns do not prevent nonwhite students from having access to the most desirable schools."

Perhaps when Thomas has replaced the School Board with candidates more to his liking, he can start to replace the Supreme Court. Otherwise, he's out of luck.

Unable to rebut my argument, Mozart resorts to distorting both the Seattle decision and my argument.

Seattle prohibits individual student school assignments based on the ethnicity of the individual student. No one advocates that system for Faifax. We don't need it to correct the ethnic and other imbalance exacerbated by the actions of Janie and Liz and enabled by the rest of the Board.

Seattle offers no support for Mozart's defense of the current imbalances.

My position is that these percentages can look more like each other and should look more like each other:

County average 45% white - Langley 73%

County average 18% hispanic - Langley 3%

County average 10% black - Langley 2%

County average 22% F/RL - Langley 2%

County average 12% LEP - Langley 4%

That these percentages are perpetuated by expensive, unnecessary busing of kids 17 miles and capital expenditures that gave preference to buildings that perpetuated and exacerbated those ethnic and other imbalances.

I advocate ending 17 mile bus rides and capital expenditures that make those imbalances worse and adjust boundaries to make FCPS high schools and middle schools (note not elementary schools) lot more like the County median.

In agreement with Thomas More's post at 1:41 pm. Nicely summed up!

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Unable to rebut my argument, Mozart resorts to
> distorting both the Seattle decision and my
> argument.
>
> Seattle prohibits individual student school
> assignments based on the ethnicity of the
> individual student. No one advocates that system
> for Faifax. We don't need it to correct the
> ethnic and other imbalance exacerbated by the
> actions of Janie and Liz and enabled by the rest
> of the Board.
>
> Seattle offers no support for Mozart's defense of
> the current imbalances.
>
> My position is that these percentages can look
> more like each other and should look more like
> each other:
>
> County average 45% white - Langley 73%
>
> County average 18% hispanic - Langley 3%
>
> County average 10% black - Langley 2%
>
> County average 22% F/RL - Langley 2%
>
> County average 12% LEP - Langley 4%
>
> That these percentages are perpetuated by
> expensive, unnecessary busing of kids 17 miles and
> capital expenditures that gave preference to
> buildings that perpetuated and exacerbated those
> ethnic and other imbalances.
>
> I advocate ending 17 mile bus rides and capital
> expenditures that make those imbalances worse and
> adjust boundaries to make FCPS high schools and
> middle schools (note not elementary schools) lot
> more like the County median.

Oh - so all you really care about is adjusting the Langley boundaries? That can be done on any number of grounds that don't entail race-based manipulations.

I did not distort the Seattle decision; I read it. You simply allude to cases you probably haven't read and certainly don't understand.

At the end of the day, you couldn't do what you propose - if in fact you have adjustments to a broad range of boundaries in mind - without starting to look at specific neighborhoods and individual students. How else do you achieve the happy median? If what one ended up with where gerry-mandered boundaries where students were required to travel many miles from their homes to achieve your preferred racial balance, the Seattle decision would be highly relevant.

In any event, it won't happen in your lifetime. You're all aflutter about redistributing white students to places other than Langley, but they are redistributing themselves without your help (from 72% of FCPS in 1990-01 to 44% in 2010-11). The last thing a School Board or court is going to do, particularly given these trends, is to implement some half-assed redistricting that accelerates the departure of white students from FCPS.

Let us know when ANY serious school board candidate will come out in favor of what you propose beyond simply adjusting Langley's boundaries.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2011 05:58PM by Mozart.

You know what, I never understood why Facilities had the "rule of thumb" on the "3 miles radius" for bussing students while the Langley boundary has largely been protected from the SL redistricting--come on, the pink elephant is there sitting in the living room. Many boundaries around here are more than 3 miles with some much more such as the Langley boundary and portion of Chantilly corridor that is now in the Oakton district.

I understand where Thomas More is coming from and....

I think Langley should become part of the high school redistricting at some point. Its' boundary is ridiculous.

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh - so all you really care about is adjusting the Langley boundaries? That can be done on any number of grounds that don't entail race-based manipulations.<

More distortions. Langley is one of 6 or 7 such schools previously identified in my postings. I also listed 3 identifiable Hispanic schools and one identifiable African-American school.

> I did not distort the Seattle decision; I read it.<

If you read it, you definitely didn't understand it or are intentionally distorting it.

> At the end of the day, you couldn't do what you propose - if in fact you have adjustments to a broad range of boundaries in mind - without starting to look at specific neighborhoods and individual students.How else do you achieve the happy median?<

Simply use the demographics of the elementary schools that make up the high school pyramid which Seattle specifically endorses.

> If what one ended up with where gerry-mandered boundaries where students were required to travel many miles from their homes to achieve your preferred racial balance, the Seattle decision would be highly relevant.<

Any solution would result in shorter bus rides than the 17 miles we pay for now. Or the ride from Chantilly to Oakton.

> The last thing a School Board or court is going to do, , , , accelerates the departure of white students from FCPS.<

Given the size of the County (400 square miles), the size of the school population (172,000) and the quality of the schools, white flight is not likely to be a threat in your lifetime.

> Let us know when ANY serious school board candidate will come out in favor of what you propose beyond simply adjusting Langley's boundaries.<

Several already acknowledge the County-wide problem.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> My position is that these percentages can look
> more like each other and should look more like
> each other:
>
> County average 45% white - Langley 73%
>
> County average 18% hispanic - Langley 3%
>
> County average 10% black - Langley 2%
>
> County average 22% F/RL - Langley 2%
>
> County average 12% LEP - Langley 4%
>
> That these percentages are perpetuated by
> expensive, unnecessary busing of kids 17 miles and
> capital expenditures that gave preference to
> buildings that perpetuated and exacerbated those
> ethnic and other imbalances.
>
> I advocate ending 17 mile bus rides and capital
> expenditures that make those imbalances worse and
> adjust boundaries to make FCPS high schools and
> middle schools (note not elementary schools) lot
> more like the County median.

Can't comment on the Seattle case. But looking at the above percentages, clearly some other ethnic groups were left out of your metrics, a total of 27% of the County averages remain- just curious, why? I think the ethnic make-up of a school is relatively meaningless to the affluency (or lack thereof) of a school.

The problem of a 17-mile bus ride might be mitigated by total travel time - how long does it take for those children to get to school - does distance really matter? When I used to go to Thoreau Middle school it was a 45-minute ride, but the school was only 4.2 miles away on a direct route.

Where's Quantum, anyway?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2011 09:13PM by Berdhuis.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> More distortions. Langley is one of 6 or 7 such
> schools previously identified in my postings. I
> also listed 3 identifiable Hispanic schools and
> one identifiable African-American school.

You go back and forth, alternatively claiming that there are 10 high schools that need to be redistricted and then relying only on the Langley boundaries and demographics to support your proposal. It betrays the weakness of your argument that, when challenged, you fall back on Langley's situation.

No one who really looked at the data would accept your claim that there are 6-7 "White" schools," three "Hispanic" schools, and one "African-American" school. Most of the "White" schools have 40% or more non-White students. And Lee has 1% fewer Hispanic students than Annandale, but Annandale is a "Hispanic" school that needs to be redistricted, yet Lee is not? Blacks are less than 1/3 of the student body, and outnumbered by Hispanics, at Mount Vernon, your so-called "Black" school. Your arbitrary groupings are total BS, and you know it.
>
> If you read it, you definitely didn't understand
> it or are intentionally distorting it.

I won't argue with you about the Seattle case. I not only read it, but quoted from it. It's highly unlikely a federal court would tolerate the type of race-based assignments that you propose - which ultimately would entail judgments as to the schools that individual students should attend based on their race. At a minimum, the uncertainty as to how such a plan would be received would deter its adoption.

> Simply use the demographics of the elementary
> schools that make up the high school pyramid which
> Seattle specifically endorses.

Where is this specifically endorsed in Seattle? In case you aren't aware, it's usually the majority rulings in a case that have precedential impact, not dissents.

The burden is on you, in any event, to explain how changing the elementary schools that comprise a particular pyramid would achieve your objectives without running afoul of the equal protection considerations identified in Seattle. You'd actually end up with Langley in reverse - white students with an argument that their right to equal protection was violated because they were bused 10 miles to Mount Vernon, even though other schools were closer, while black students got to attend their neighborhood school.


>
> Any solution would result in shorter bus rides
> than the 17 miles we pay for now. Or the ride from
> Chantilly to Oakton.

Back to Langley again. Yawn. Langley's situation is sui generis among Fairfax County high schools. You can justify changes to its boundaries on grounds that are not explicitly race-based at all. Whatever the situation with Langley is, it doesn't justify redistricting nine other schools to satisfy your arbitrary racial targets.


> > The last thing a School Board or court is going
> to do, , , , accelerates the departure of white
> students from FCPS.<
>
> Given the size of the County (400 square miles),
> the size of the school population (172,000) and
> the quality of the schools, white flight is not
> likely to be a threat in your lifetime.

I don't view it as a threat, but simply as a demographic reality that has already taken place. The School Board would not take steps that are not compelled by any rational policy or legal precedent and which would aggravate the movement of white families to Arlington and Loudoun that is already taking place.

Of course, if the quality of the schools is high, that begs the question as to why one would undertake such a redistricting, other than your resentment of Langley.
>
> > Let us know when ANY serious school board
> candidate will come out in favor of what you
> propose beyond simply adjusting Langley's
> boundaries.<
>
> Several already acknowledge the County-wide
> problem.

Who? What exactly is the "County-wide problem"? I'm inclined to believe that any candidate seeking election has a very different conception of the "problem" than you do.

Dream on, Thomas More



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 03/06/2011 10:18PM by Mozart.

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can't comment on the Seattle case. But looking at the above percentages, clearly some other ethnic groups were left out of your metrics, a total of 27% of the County averages remain- just curious,<

No state secrets, County wide "Asians" are 19% and "other" are 6%. No clue where the remaining 2% fall. Rounding eror?

Still hanging for a suggested alternative phrase from you.

> why? I think the ethnic make-up of a school is relatively meaningless to the affluency (or lack thereof) of a school.<

Most research says both are germane

> The problem of a 17-mile bus ride might be mitigated by total travel time - how long does it take for those children to get to school - does distance really matter? When I used to go to Thoreau Middle school it was a 45-minute ride, but the school was only 4.2 miles away on a direct route.<

The 17 mile bus ride stretches from the Loudoun line north of Route 7 to within 3 miles of the Arlington County line. The buses travel in the same direction as the morning rush hour along Old Dominion and Route 7. The ride has to be a bear.

> Where's Quantum, anyway?

No clue on his current whereabouts. His postings were always hard to read because he refused to use the return key as often as the rest of us.

Herndon High was renovated before South County was even built.....Know you history before you make incorrect comments .....

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You go back and forth, alternatively claiming that there are 10 high schools that need to be redistricted and then relying only on the Langley boundaries and demographics to support your proposal. It betrays the weakness of your argument that, when challenged, you fall back on Langley's situation.<

You are familiar with the use of an exemplar in argument.

But just so we have a fuller picture: Madison 73% white; Oakton 62% white; Woodson 62% white; McLean 61% white; Robinson 61% white; West Springfield 61% white; Chantilly 58% white.

County average 45% white; 18% Hispanic; 10% African American

Plurality Hispanic: Annandale 29% white 30% hispanic; Stuart 42% hispanic 26% white; Falls Church 39% hispanic 25% white

Pluarlity African American: Mount Vernon African-American 34% white 26%

> Most of the "White" schools have 40% or more non-White students.<

Of the 8 "white" schools, only 1, Chantilly has more than 40% non-white.

> Lee has 1% fewer Hispanic students than Annandale, but Annandale is a "Hispanic" school that needs to be redistricted, yet Lee is not?<

If you're proposeing redistricting Lee, I don't object.

> Blacks are less than 1/3 of the student body, and outnumbered by Hispanics, at Mount Vernon, your so-called "Black" school.<

Mount Vernon: African Americans 34%; Hispanics 28%; "Whites" 26%.

> It's highly unlikely a federal court would tolerate the type of race-based assignments that you propose - which ultimately would entail judgments as to the schools that individual students should attend based on their race. At a minimum,<

You clearly do not understand the Seattle case and are unable to distinguish it from other cases that uphold boundaries drawn to diminish deviations in demographic from the division wide median which plans have not only been upheld but imposed by the courts.

> the uncertainty as to how such a plan would be received would deter its adoption.<

So you propose doing nothing and defend the status quo?

> You'd actually end up with Langley in reverse - white students with an argument that their right to equal protection was violated because they were bused 10 miles to Mount Vernon, even though other schools were closer, while black students got to attend their neighborhood school.<

This is non-sense. In the eastern end of the County several high schools are less than 10 miles apart.

> > Any solution would result in shorter bus rides than the 17 miles we pay for now. Or the ride from Chantilly to Oakton.< <
>
> Back to Langley again. Yawn. Langley's situation is sui generis among Fairfax County high schools.<

That's why I also mentioned the Chantilly to Oakton run which is also long and non-sensical.

> . . . aggravate the movement of white families to Arlington and Loudoun that is already taking place.<

First, you'd have to show that there is white flight from Fairfax to Loudoun or Arlington.

> Of course, if the quality of the schools is high, that begs the question as to why one would undertake such a redistricting, other than your resentment of Langley.<

Isn't this "separate but equal" rehashed?

Of course, we know that, according to Brown, separate is inherently unequal.

Do you deny that to?

thor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Herndon High was renovated before South County was even built.....Know you history before you make incorrect comments .....<

It's on the list to be renovated again. It certainly needs it.

If you recall, from the last redistricting, the Chantilly to Oakton run was unwanted by the affected families. They wanted to stay at Chantilly.

Chantilly had to unload kids in order to satisfy the sham of a redistricting. They had to find "overcrowding" in West county schools to justify redistricting to South Lakes. Of course, Langley's new addition was the "elephant in the room." Those kids should have been sent to South Lakes instead of adding on to Langley.

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/redistricting/

This could be the reason that the schools are "out of balance". Look at the maps.

boundary memories Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you recall, from the last redistricting, the
> Chantilly to Oakton run was unwanted by the
> affected families. They wanted to stay at
> Chantilly.
>
> Chantilly had to unload kids in order to satisfy
> the sham of a redistricting. They had to find
> "overcrowding" in West county schools to justify
> redistricting to South Lakes. Of course,
> Langley's new addition was the "elephant in the
> room." Those kids should have been sent to South
> Lakes instead of adding on to Langley.

+1

boundary memories Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you recall, from the last redistricting, the
> Chantilly to Oakton run was unwanted by the
> affected families. They wanted to stay at
> Chantilly.
>
> Chantilly had to unload kids in order to satisfy
> the sham of a redistricting. They had to find
> "overcrowding" in West county schools to justify
> redistricting to South Lakes. Of course,
> Langley's new addition was the "elephant in the
> room." Those kids should have been sent to South
> Lakes instead of adding on to Langley.

aye.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are familiar with the use of an exemplar in
> argument.

I am. But if all you can fall back on over the course of an extended colloquy is the unfairness of Langley's boundaries and demographics, it demonstrates that you don't know how to address the particular circumstances relating to the other schools. Put up or shut up.

>
> But just so we have a fuller picture: Madison 73%
> white; Oakton 62% white; Woodson 62% white; McLean
> 61% white; Robinson 61% white; West Springfield
> 61% white; Chantilly 58% white.

So instead of six "white" schools, you think there are eight. Why stop there? There are four more schools where whites are currently a majority (Westfield, South County, Marshall and Lake Braddock) and seven more where whites are a plurality. Do they all get redistricted so that each has the projected percentage of white students in the entire system in a year or two? How are you going to do that without busing students in every which direction? No one will support it.
>
> County average 45% white; 18% Hispanic; 10%
> African American
>
> Plurality Hispanic: Annandale 29% white 30%
> hispanic; Stuart 42% hispanic 26% white; Falls
> Church 39% hispanic 25% white

The two other schools that are plurality Hispanic are Lee (31.1%) and Mount Vernon (32.9%). What are you going to do about that? Swap blacks at West Potomac and Hayfield for Hispanics at Lee and Mount Vernon?
>
> Pluarlity African American: Mount Vernon
> African-American 34% white 26%

Nope. Mount Vernon is plurality Hispanic (33%), not plurality Black (31%).

What's the goal of labeling a school that is less than 1/3 and not plurality African-American "black"? I guess stereotyping a school is OK as long as you're the one affixing the label.
>
> > Most of the "White" schools have 40% or more
> non-White students.<
>
> Of the 8 "white" schools, only 1, Chantilly has
> more than 40% non-white.

The only schools with 60% or more "white" enrollments are Langley, Madison, Oakton and Woodson. By next year, Oakton will be under 60% as well.

>
> > Lee has 1% fewer Hispanic students than
> Annandale, but Annandale is a "Hispanic" school
> that needs to be redistricted, yet Lee is not?<
>
> If you're proposeing redistricting Lee, I don't
> object.

I'm not proposing to redistrict Lee to achieve some illusory racial target, but only to point out how completely arbitrary and non-sensical your labels of schools are.

> > Blacks are less than 1/3 of the student body,
> and outnumbered by Hispanics, at Mount Vernon,
> your so-called "Black" school.<
>
> Mount Vernon: African Americans 34%; Hispanics
> 28%; "Whites" 26%.

Source? It's not FCPS's latest demographic information.
>
> > It's highly unlikely a federal court would
> tolerate the type of race-based assignments that
> you propose - which ultimately would entail
> judgments as to the schools that individual
> students should attend based on their race. At a
> minimum,<
>
> You clearly do not understand the Seattle case and
> are unable to distinguish it from other cases that
> uphold boundaries drawn to diminish deviations in
> demographic from the division wide median which
> plans have not only been upheld but imposed by the
> courts.

There won't be any artificial boundaries of the type you propose imposed on FCPS. It's been found to be a "unified" school system, which means (under controlling Supreme Court precedent) that it has no legal obligation to devise boundaries or enrollment plans that somehow would remedy past discrimination. Read the case again if you don't understand that.

> > the uncertainty as to how such a plan would be
> received would deter its adoption.<
>
> So you propose doing nothing and defend the status
> quo?

There is no status quo, dude. The demographic patterns in FCPS are evolving constantly, and FCPS is one of the most ethnically diverse school systems in the country. Proposing some bogus, comprehensive redistricting that, at its heart, reflects the out-dated concept that there are a fixed number of black and white students within a jurisdiction who can be dispatched from one school to another to create some purportedly perfect ethnic balance that can be maintained for years to come is a non-starter. You're on another planet (or maybe just in Reston) if you think School Board members would propose it, or that parents would support it in significant numbers.

And why should that satisfy you anyway? Let's say you get rid of another 12-13% of the white students at Oakton and replace them with black students from South Lakes (who'll be a precious commodity, because you'll also want to send them to Langley). What happens if those black students are "under-represented" in the honors/AP courses at Oakton? Do you then change the composition of each classroom?

I'm not against redistricting when undertaken to maximize the efficient use of facilities or deploy transportation resources efficiently. Embarking upon a major redistricting to replicate the county's overall racial demographics in every middle or high school (and you've never explained why you only care about those schools, and not elementary schools as well) would be a colossal waste of time that would fail to achieve its intended goals.
>
> > You'd actually end up with Langley in reverse -
> white students with an argument that their right
> to equal protection was violated because they were
> bused 10 miles to Mount Vernon, even though other
> schools were closer, while black students got to
> attend their neighborhood school.<
>
> This is non-sense. In the eastern end of the
> County several high schools are less than 10 miles
> apart.

Sure there are. But all of the schools close to Langley, such as McLean, Madison and Marshall, are majority white. So you probably only end up tinkering with the demographics at the margins or engaging in long-distance busing.
>
>
> That's why I also mentioned the Chantilly to
> Oakton run which is also long and non-sensical.
>
> > . . . aggravate the movement of white families
> to Arlington and Loudoun that is already taking
> place.<
>
> First, you'd have to show that there is white
> flight from Fairfax to Loudoun or Arlington.

Look at the statistics. White enrollment in Fairfax has plummeted from 1990 to 2010, while it has increased in both Arlington and Loudoun. I can't prove it's all out-migration from Fairfax, but some of it clearly is, and those jurisdictions would serve as a safety valve for white and other families who aren't interested in having their kids serve as a pawn in someone else's demographic manipulations.

> > Of course, if the quality of the schools is
> high, that begs the question as to why one would
> undertake such a redistricting, other than your
> resentment of Langley.<
>
> Isn't this "separate but equal" rehashed?

No. We do not have a dual school system in Fairfax County. Whatever you think of Langley circa 2011, it is not the white equivalent of Luther Jackson circa 1960.

>
> Of course, we know that, according to Brown,
> separate is inherently unequal.
>
> Do you deny that to?

No. But Seattle reflects the Supreme Court's current views, which is that Brown was about eliminating race-based distinctions - which is precisely what you propose to rely upon in your vague redistricting proposals that would affect some students differently than others, depending on their race.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2011 06:00PM by Mozart.

map watcher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/redistricting/
>
> This could be the reason that the schools are "out
> of balance". Look at the maps.

From the FAQs:

"Does redistricting affect school boundaries or police, fire and human service districts?

No. These boundaries are unrelated to the electoral districts for the Board of Supervisors, and the redistricting will have no affect on school boundaries or police, fire and human service districts."

reader wrote:
map watcher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/redistricting/
>
> This could be the reason that the schools are "out
> of balance". Look at the maps.

From the FAQs:

"Does redistricting affect school boundaries or police, fire and human service districts?

No. These boundaries are unrelated to the electoral districts for the Board of Supervisors, and the redistricting will have no affect on school boundaries or police, fire and human service districts."


My point was that if you look at the maps you will see that the schools pretty much go along with the areas where they are located in racial make-up.

My personal feeling is that students should go to the nearest school whenever possible. I think it is important to build a sense of community and this is much more effective if the school is nearby. If one school is more heavy in a certain minority than another, then so be it.

I taught in a bussed school in another state. When half of the kids live further away than the others it results in social segregation within the school. (I am talking elementary school.) When most are walkers and the others get on the bus, the division is pretty obvious.

I think in some cases that FCPS spreads around some kids inthe hope of hiding the problem of low achievement rather than fixing it. There are no "tricks" or magic gimmicks. It takes hard work and expectations. All children can learn.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Still hanging for a suggested alternative phrase from you.

In context from a post above (pardon any confusing formatting):

"> > "Lily white" is a racist phrase

> Other than the intellectual descendants of Nathan Bedford Forest and yourself, > who would make such a foolish assertion?

> > that, in any event, does not accurately describe Langley, which has a substantial and growing percentage of Asian students.

> When the rest of FCPS high schools are 45% white and Langley is 73% white, with > almost no African-Americans or Hispanics, it's a fair description to convey the > disproportionate ethnic distribution of that school and 5 or 6 others.

> However, if there's a better phrase to quickly convey the phenomenon, feel free > to suggest it."

I offer this phrase in support of your argument: 'European-American'. Your thoughts?

However, I truly believe that 'irrelevant' is the best option.

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am. But if all you can fall back on over the course of an extended colloquy is the unfairness of Langley's boundaries and demographics,<

More distortions.

I've cited multiple schools not just Langley.

Why are you obsessed with Langley?

> So instead of six "white" schools, you think there
> are eight. Why stop there?

I wrote there were 6 other "white" schools besides Langley and some could include Chantilly.

But if distracting by picking nits is the best you have to offer, my argument prevails.

> There are four more schools where whites are currently a majority (Westfield, South County, Marshall and Lake Braddock) and seven more where whites are a plurality.<

Most cases do not required perfect reflection of locality wide percentages in each school in a district.

> How are you going to do that without busing students in every which direction?

No one said anything about busing except to note that we busing to perpetuate segregation now.

> The two other schools that are plurality Hispanic are Lee (31.1%) and Mount Vernon (32.9%).<

> Mount Vernon is plurality Hispanic (33%), not plurality Black (31%).

Those are not the numbers I have from FCPS.

> I guess stereotyping a school is OK as long as you're the one affixing the label.<

You grossly misuse the term stereotyping. My description is neither fixed nor oversimplified

> The only schools with 60% or more "white" enrollments are Langley, Madison, Oakton and Woodson.<

Again I have different numbers from FCPS

> By next year, Oakton will be under 60% as well.<

It will still be 15% more white than the County average.

> Source? It's not FCPS's latest demographic information.

FCPS' latest County-wide demographic info.

> There won't be any artificial boundaries of the type you propose imposed on FCPS.<

The current boundaries are artificial. Why do you insist on defending the current boundaries?

> It's been found to be a "unified" school system, which means (under controlling Supreme Court precedent) that it has no legal obligation to devise boundaries or enrollment plans that somehow would remedy past discrimination.<

Cite?

Fairfax has discriminated in the past.

Under your theory, a school district is free to engage in new segregation or re-segregation with no remedy to the victims of that segregation. Nonsense.

> There is no status quo, dude. The demographic patterns in FCPS are evolving constantly, and FCPS is one of the most ethnically diverse school systems in the country.<

With identifiably white, hispanic and African-American high school.

> Proposing some bogus, comprehensive redistricting that, at its heart, reflects the out-dated concept that there are a fixed number of black and white students within a jurisdiction who can be dispatched from one school to another to create some purportedly perfec ethnic balance that can be maintained for years to come is a non-starter. You're on another planet (or maybe just in Reston) if you think School Board members would propose it, or that parents would support it in significant numbers.<

One distortion piled atop another doesn't save your untenable defense of a newly and obviously segregated school system.

> And why should that satisfy you anyway? Let's say you get rid of another 12-13% of the white students at Oakton and replace them with black students from South Lakes (who'll be a precious commodity, because you'll also want to send them to Langley). What happens if those black students are "under-represented" in the honors/AP courses at Oakton? Do you then change the composition of each classroom?<

Reducio absurdem, a classic rhetorical ploy. No one made that suggestion.


> all of the schools close to> Langley, such as McLean, Madison and Marshall, are majority white.<

Falls Church is 9 miles from Langley. Stuart is 8. If 17 miles is an ok bus ride, those distances should be acceptable. Forest Edge is closer to Langley than Forestville.

> White enrollment in Fairfax has plummeted from 1990 to 2010,<

plummeted? Give us the exact number and not your editorializing. FCPS has 172,000 kids. How many in Arlington? How many in Loudoun?

> while it has increased in both Arlington and Loudoun.

Lets have the numbers.

> I can't prove it's all out-migration from Fairfax,

First honest thing you've written.


> but some of it clearly is, and those jurisdictions would serve as a safety valve for white and other families who aren't interested in having their kids serve as a pawn in someone else's demographic manipulations.<

The present manipulations are acceptable to you and worth this effort in defending. Why?

> No. We do not have a dual school system in Fairfax County. Whatever you think of Langley circa 2011, it is not the white equivalent of Luther Jackson circa 1960.<

You're confusing de facto with de jure. Many cities had a de jure unified system yet had identifiably white and non-white schools and were held to violate the Constitution.

> No. But Seattle reflects the Supreme Court's current views, which is that Brown was about eliminating race-based distinctions . . .<

So you think Seattle overturned Brown? Wishful thinking on your part.

Justice Kennedy, the deciding opinion in the Seattle case, specifically wrote that public schools are permitted to consider a school’s racial makeup and school boards are free to devise race-conscious measures in a general way including drawing attendance zones with recognition of neighborhood demographics.

Seattle does not support your position. It supports mine.

But keep defending the current artificial boundaries, Mozart, that separate white kids from other ethnic groups, rich kids from poor, native English speakers from those for whom English is a second language. You've made very clear the kind of society you'd prefer: Virginia circa 1950.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mozart Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I am. But if all you can fall back on over the
> course of an extended colloquy is the unfairness
> of Langley's boundaries and demographics,<
>
> More distortions.
>
> I've cited multiple schools not just Langley.
>
> Why are you obsessed with Langley?
>
> > So instead of six "white" schools, you think
> there
> > are eight. Why stop there?
>
> I wrote there were 6 other "white" schools besides
> Langley and some could include Chantilly.
>
> But if distracting by picking nits is the best you
> have to offer, my argument prevails.
>
> > There are four more schools where whites are
> currently a majority (Westfield, South County,
> Marshall and Lake Braddock) and seven more where
> whites are a plurality.<
>
> Most cases do not required perfect reflection of
> locality wide percentages in each school in a
> district.
>
> > How are you going to do that without busing
> students in every which direction?
>
> No one said anything about busing except to note
> that we busing to perpetuate segregation now.
>
> > The two other schools that are plurality
> Hispanic are Lee (31.1%) and Mount Vernon
> (32.9%).<
>
> > Mount Vernon is plurality Hispanic (33%), not
> plurality Black (31%).
>
> Those are not the numbers I have from FCPS.
>
> > I guess stereotyping a school is OK as long as
> you're the one affixing the label.<
>
> You grossly misuse the term stereotyping. My
> description is neither fixed nor oversimplified
>
> > The only schools with 60% or more "white"
> enrollments are Langley, Madison, Oakton and
> Woodson.<
>
> Again I have different numbers from FCPS
>
> > By next year, Oakton will be under 60% as
> well.<
>
> It will still be 15% more white than the County
> average.
>
> > Source? It's not FCPS's latest demographic
> information.
>
> FCPS' latest County-wide demographic info.
>
> > There won't be any artificial boundaries of the
> type you propose imposed on FCPS.<
>
> The current boundaries are artificial. Why do you
> insist on defending the current boundaries?
>
> > It's been found to be a "unified" school system,
> which means (under controlling Supreme Court
> precedent) that it has no legal obligation to
> devise boundaries or enrollment plans that somehow
> would remedy past discrimination.<
>
> Cite?
>
> Fairfax has discriminated in the past.
>
> Under your theory, a school district is free to
> engage in new segregation or re-segregation with
> no remedy to the victims of that segregation.
> Nonsense.
>
> > There is no status quo, dude. The demographic
> patterns in FCPS are evolving constantly, and FCPS
> is one of the most ethnically diverse school
> systems in the country.<
>
> With identifiably white, hispanic and
> African-American high school.
>
> > Proposing some bogus, comprehensive
> redistricting that, at its heart, reflects the
> out-dated concept that there are a fixed number of
> black and white students within a jurisdiction who
> can be dispatched from one school to another to
> create some purportedly perfec ethnic balance that
> can be maintained for years to come is a
> non-starter. You're on another planet (or maybe
> just in Reston) if you think School Board members
> would propose it, or that parents would support it
> in significant numbers.<
>
> One distortion piled atop another doesn't save
> your untenable defense of a newly and obviously
> segregated school system.
>
> > And why should that satisfy you anyway? Let's
> say you get rid of another 12-13% of the white
> students at Oakton and replace them with black
> students from South Lakes (who'll be a precious
> commodity, because you'll also want to send them
> to Langley). What happens if those black students
> are "under-represented" in the honors/AP courses
> at Oakton? Do you then change the composition of
> each classroom?<
>
> Reducio absurdem, a classic rhetorical ploy. No
> one made that suggestion.
>
>
> > all of the schools close to> Langley, such as
> McLean, Madison and Marshall, are majority
> white.<
>
> Falls Church is 9 miles from Langley. Stuart is
> 8. If 17 miles is an ok bus ride, those distances
> should be acceptable. Forest Edge is closer to
> Langley than Forestville.
>
> > White enrollment in Fairfax has plummeted from
> 1990 to 2010,<
>
> plummeted? Give us the exact number and not your
> editorializing. FCPS has 172,000 kids. How many in
> Arlington? How many in Loudoun?
>
> > while it has increased in both Arlington and
> Loudoun.
>
> Lets have the numbers.
>
> > I can't prove it's all out-migration from
> Fairfax,
>
> First honest thing you've written.
>
>
> > but some of it clearly is, and those
> jurisdictions would serve as a safety valve for
> white and other families who aren't interested in
> having their kids serve as a pawn in someone
> else's demographic manipulations.<
>
> The present manipulations are acceptable to you
> and worth this effort in defending. Why?
>
>
> > No. We do not have a dual school system in
> Fairfax County. Whatever you think of Langley
> circa 2011, it is not the white equivalent of
> Luther Jackson circa 1960.<
>
> You're confusing de facto with de jure. Many
> cities had a de jure unified system yet had
> identifiably white and non-white schools and were
> held to violate the Constitution.
>
> > No. But Seattle reflects the Supreme Court's
> current views, which is that Brown was about
> eliminating race-based distinctions . . .<
>
> So you think Seattle overturned Brown? Wishful
> thinking on your part.
>
> Justice Kennedy, the deciding opinion in the
> Seattle case, specifically wrote that public
> schools are permitted to consider a school’s
> racial makeup and school boards are free to devise
> race-conscious measures in a general way including
> drawing attendance zones with recognition of
> neighborhood demographics.
>
> Seattle does not support your position. It
> supports mine.
>
> But keep defending the current artificial
> boundaries, Mozart, that separate white kids from
> other ethnic groups, rich kids from poor, native
> English speakers from those for whom English is a
> second language. You've made very clear the kind
> of society you'd prefer: Virginia circa 1950.


Schools should be in the business of providing the best education to the kids -not to promoting political agendas such as socio-economic re-engineering, ethnic balancing, etc.

+1 to nomorepolitics

There is a certain racist quality to Thomas More's arguments.

I'm guessing that you somehow feel you lost out on the SL or maybe Langley redistricting (which was a long time ago). Perhaps you can see houses that attend Forestville from your back window. You certainly have an axe to grind against Langley for some reason. I wonder how you would feel if you had not lost out.

Whatever the case, you won't feel vindicated until some of those 'rich, white' kids that attend Langley are redistricted into the more diverse Herndon or SL HS's.

That sentiment presupposes that:

1) White schools are by definition better schools
2) Majority minority schools are inferior in every way and should be avoided

Is that the platform you'd like to see in school board candidates?

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I've cited multiple schools not just Langley.

True, that you've arbitrarily cited different schools at different times. But, when push comes to shove, Langley is the only school as to which you've offered any specific suggestion as to how to change the demographics (i.e., by excluding one of the Great Falls schools from Langley's pyramid and including one of the Reston schools). It gets harder from there and you have nothing else to say.

>
> Why are you obsessed with Langley?

I'm not. I think one could argue in favor of changing Langley's boundaries for reasons that are not related to changing its racial profile, such as reducing the county's transportation costs, but that's about it.

>
> > So instead of six "white" schools, you think
> there
> > are eight. Why stop there?
>
> I wrote there were 6 other "white" schools besides
> Langley and some could include Chantilly.

As I've shown, your characterization of certain schools as "white" is arbitrary, since there are more schools that are majority-white and even more that are plurality-white. Of course, none of these schools is all-white. Perhaps we should just call them "too white for Thomas" and proceed from there.
>
> But if distracting by picking nits is the best you
> have to offer, my argument prevails.

What you call "picking nits" I view as "blowing holes" - your classifications are specious and arbitrary.
>
>
> Most cases do not required perfect reflection of
> locality wide percentages in each school in a
> district.

So what? There's no requirement that FCPS redistrict and you've pointed to no authority to require it to do so. If you think otherwise, you're mistaken.

>
> > How are you going to do that without busing
> students in every which direction?
>
> No one said anything about busing except to note
> that we busing to perpetuate segregation now.

What are you talking about? Langley again?

You apparently define "segregation" as attendance at any school where the demographics do not match the county average as a whole within some unspecified, deviation. Very few here would share that perception. People here come from all the country - and world - and see a degree of integration here far beyond what existed in their home towns or native countries. Many of the non-Whites would be among the most vocal opponents of what you propose.

>
> > The two other schools that are plurality
> Hispanic are Lee (31.1%) and Mount Vernon
> (32.9%).<
>
> > Mount Vernon is plurality Hispanic (33%), not
> plurality Black (31%).
>
> Those are not the numbers I have from FCPS.

My numbers come from the 9/30/10 "Report of Student Membership by Ethnicity, Race, and Gender" issued by FCPS. What's the basis for yours?

>
> > I guess stereotyping a school is OK as long as
> you're the one affixing the label.<
>
> You grossly misuse the term stereotyping. My
> description is neither fixed nor oversimplified

It certainly is, and I don't want someone like you deciding how schools (or, for that matter, students) in this county are classified for racial purposes.
>
> > The only schools with 60% or more "white"
> enrollments are Langley, Madison, Oakton and
> Woodson.<
>
> Again I have different numbers from FCPS

It seems that you either have outdated numbers or bootleg numbers that are inconsistent with the latest statistical information published on the FCPS web site. Either share the source of your numbers or concede yours are obsolete.
>
> > By next year, Oakton will be under 60% as
> well.<
>
> It will still be 15% more white than the County
> average.

So what?

> > There won't be any artificial boundaries of the
> type you propose imposed on FCPS.<
>
> The current boundaries are artificial. Why do you
> insist on defending the current boundaries?

Whether the current boundaries are good or bad, or could be made more rational, those you have in mind would be even worse.

>
> > It's been found to be a "unified" school system,
> which means (under controlling Supreme Court
> precedent) that it has no legal obligation to
> devise boundaries or enrollment plans that somehow
> would remedy past discrimination.<
>
> Cite?

April 1965 Department of Education Order.
>
> Under your theory, a school district is free to
> engage in new segregation or re-segregation with
> no remedy to the victims of that segregation.
> Nonsense.

No, what this means is that the race-based "solutions" you propose can't be justified as necessary to redress past discrimination. Instead, they would likely be deemed subject to strict scrutiny.

>
> > There is no status quo, dude. The demographic
> patterns in FCPS are evolving constantly, and FCPS
> is one of the most ethnically diverse school
> systems in the country.<
>
> With identifiably white, hispanic and
> African-American high school.

Bull shit. Most people go into the schools and see a bunch of kids - of considerable diversity - not an "identifiably white, hispanic or African-American high school."
>
> One distortion piled atop another doesn't save
> your untenable defense of a newly and obviously
> segregated school system.

There's no requirement that FCPS draw current boundaries to achieve a particular racial balance at every school.

How is the school system "newly segregated" - all the data would show most of these schools becoming progressively more diverse over time.

If you think the school demographics are so offensive, you ought to be advocating for different housing patterns, not devising absurb boundaries.

>
>
> Falls Church is 9 miles from Langley. Stuart is
> 8. If 17 miles is an ok bus ride, those distances
> should be acceptable. Forest Edge is closer to
> Langley than Forestville.

Why are you obsessed with Langley?

Anyway, your lame response only underscores the problem. You can't send kids from the area near Stuart to Langley without gerry-mandering the boundaries for Falls Church, Marshall, McLean as well. You only have ideas, but no concept at all as to how they'd be implemented in a manner that wouldn't require, for example, Hispanic kids who currently walk to Stuart to have long bus rides to Langley or McLean (I leave out Marshall, because its demographics are about as close to the county averages as any high school in the county, so you have to leave it alone, and Falls Church, which has almost as many Hispanic students as Stuart). You presume that's what kids who live in Culmore or their families want, but that's nuts.
>
> > White enrollment in Fairfax has plummeted from
> 1990 to 2010,<
>
> plummeted? Give us the exact number and not your
> editorializing.

The number of white students declined from 93,171 in 1990 to 76,507 in 2010, a period during which the total enrollment in FCPS increased by over 44,000. FCPS isn't going to try to accelerate that decline to make you happy.
>
> > while it has increased in both Arlington and
> Loudoun.
>
> Lets have the numbers.

Look it up yourself. It's readily available on the ACPS and LCPS sites.
>
> > but some of it clearly is, and those
> jurisdictions would serve as a safety valve for
> white and other families who aren't interested in
> having their kids serve as a pawn in someone
> else's demographic manipulations.<
>
> The present manipulations are acceptable to you
> and worth this effort in defending. Why?

As noted above, while there may be flaws with the current boundaries, what you propose would be far worse.
>
>
>
> You're confusing de facto with de jure. Many
> cities had a de jure unified system yet had
> identifiably white and non-white schools and were
> held to violate the Constitution.

You're confusing de jure with uniform. Please explain to me how a black student at Mount Vernon is attending a segregated, "black" school - de facto or de jure - when more than 2/3 of the students are not black, or how a Hispanic student at Annandale is attending a segregated "Hispanic" school when more than 2/3 of the students are not Hispanic.

>
> > No. But Seattle reflects the Supreme Court's
> current views, which is that Brown was about
> eliminating race-based distinctions . . .<
>
> So you think Seattle overturned Brown? Wishful
> thinking on your part.

It did not overturn Brown at all, nor is it my wish that the Supreme Court do so. Seattle interpreted Brown and applied its rationale to a different set of facts. In doing so, the plurality stated "racial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake" and that "the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."
>
> Seattle does not support your position. It
> supports mine.

You wish. The court overturned race-based school assignment systems employed in Seattle and Louisville in that case. Justice Kennedy joined in that decision.

Nothing in the plurality decision or Kennedy's concurrence supports a position that the type of redistricting you propose for FCPS is required. Kennedy specifically noted his disdain for a school assignment plan that divided students into "white" and "non-white" buckets (close to what you'd do) and the illogic of assigning students to elementary schools, but not kindergarten, based on their race (yet you'd redistrict middle and high schools, but leave elementary schools alone).

At most, there is non-binding language in Kennedy's concurrence - in which the plurality did not join - that suggests that FCPS can do what it already does in its current boundary studies - "draw attendance zones with general recognition of the demographics of neighborhoods." What you propose would either (1) go beyond that, by elevating race above other considerations or (2) only change the demographics of a few schools at the margins.

Whatever the ambiguities are in the current law, what is reasonably clear to me is that the type of system you propose would not be supported by the majority of parents and would trigger court challenges, and that the certainty of litigation would dissuade FCPS from adopting it. Conversely, there is no precedent you've cited (apart from your earlier, vague references to "Brown and its progenty" that supports a conclusion that the current system in Fairfax (or Arlington, Loudoun or Montgomery Counties, for that matter) would be found unconstitutional.

>
> But keep defending the current artificial
> boundaries, Mozart, that separate white kids from
> other ethnic groups, rich kids from poor, native
> English speakers from those for whom English is a
> second language. You've made very clear the kind
> of society you'd prefer: Virginia circa 1950.

That's weak, and you know it.

I simply oppose your proposal, since I believe it would lead to "corrosive discourse, where race serves not as an element of our diverse heritage, but instead as a bargaining chip in the political process." By the way, those are Justice Kennedy's words.

Most here agree.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2011 10:48AM by Mozart.

Note, I believe that the real segregation in FCPS at this point isn't primarily race-based as Thomas believes, it's largely socioeconomic segregation. Sure, Langley isn't 100% white any more, but what it is is 100% rich. The FCPS boundary study criteria explicitly include SES in factors to be considered by the public.

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> At most, there is non-binding language in
> Kennedy's concurrence - in which the plurality did
> not join - that suggests that FCPS can do what it
> already does in its current boundary studies -
> "draw attendance zones with general recognition of
> the demographics of neighborhoods." What you
> propose would either (1) go beyond that, by
> elevating race above other considerations or (2)
> only change the demographics of a few schools at
> the margins.
>

What you fail to recognize is that FCPS Staff/the SB determine the set of schools included in any boundary study BEFORE the public stage. The result is near determination of the results by setting the group of schools in the study. Since much of this is negotiated behind the scenes (see the Liz/Clifton threads...), Thomas has a stronger argument than you claim.

As an example of the importance of setting the group of schools, by leaving Langley (and most of Madison) out of the West County study, there was only one solution that met the "goals" of the study - Fox Mill + part of Floris + Madison Island. With Langley in, the public could have considered other solutions that might have solved several other problems -
- the waste of taxpayer's money on the Langley expansion and Langley busing, and
- the demographics of Langley.

Had Langley been included in the West County study, the public might have had an opportunity to discuss Langley's SES. As it was, the public was explicitly forbidden from considering Langley in the study.

Westfield Dad said:

Had Langley been included in the West County study, the public might have had an opportunity to discuss Langley's SES. As it was, the public was explicitly forbidden from considering Langley in the study.
+1

Janie Strauss= limousine liberal

WestfieldDad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Note, I believe that the real segregation in FCPS
> at this point isn't primarily race-based as Thomas
> believes, it's largely socioeconomic segregation.
> Sure, Langley isn't 100% white any more, but what
> it is is 100% rich. The FCPS boundary study
> criteria explicitly include SES in factors to be
> considered by the public.
>
>
> What you fail to recognize is that FCPS Staff/the
> SB determine the set of schools included in any
> boundary study BEFORE the public stage. The
> result is near determination of the results by
> setting the group of schools in the study. Since
> much of this is negotiated behind the scenes (see
> the Liz/Clifton threads...), Thomas has a stronger
> argument than you claim.
>
> As an example of the importance of setting the
> group of schools, by leaving Langley (and most of
> Madison) out of the West County study, there was
> only one solution that met the "goals" of the
> study - Fox Mill + part of Floris + Madison
> Island. With Langley in, the public could have
> considered other solutions that might have solved
> several other problems -
> - the waste of taxpayer's money on the Langley
> expansion and Langley busing, and
> - the demographics of Langley.
>
> Had Langley been included in the West County
> study, the public might have had an opportunity to
> discuss Langley's SES. As it was, the public was
> explicitly forbidden from considering Langley in
> the study.

I did not intend to suggest the West County study that excluded Langley from its scope was a model of rationality. I agree Langley should have been included - not because changing its racial demographics should be a goal per se (as Thomas wants), but because there are neighborhoods assigned to Langley that are close to South Lakes and should have been considered if increasing the enrollment of South Lakes was considered appropriate for capacity reasons.

Instead, what I wanted to convey here was that Justice Kennedy's concurrence in the Seattle case sets forth his own view - not the view of the Supreme Court as a whole - that school districts can look at racial demographics as one factor among others when they redistrict, which FCPS clearly already does to some extent in some circumstances. I'm not saying FCPS always gets it right as a matter of policy, but I continue to believe that the type of massive redistricting that Thomas proposes would engender considerable opposition from parents, would not be supported by the School Board, and would lead to litigation if adopted. You wish Langley had been included in the 2008 study, but do you really want Carson redistricted in 2012 because it's "too Asian" or whatever?

As noted, Langley's boundaries are the easy ones to attack in the court of public opinion. Redrawing the boundaries (yet again) for schools like Chantilly, Oakton or Westfield and their feeder middle schools so that they mirror the county's demographics as a whole would be far harder to sell to the public or to implement in practice.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2011 10:02PM by Mozart.

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> True, that you've arbitrarily cited different schools at different times.<

More distortions. Same schools cited multiple times

I don't have to have set out a full plan on this blog. I've set out to prove and have done so successfully, with no effective rebuttal from you, that there is a need for a broad based redistricting of FCPS.

You've made clear you don't want it and, other than defending the status quo boundaries, have offered no alternative.

> I'm not. I think one could argue in favor of changing Langley's boundaries for reasons that are not related to changing its racial profile, such as reducing the county's transportation costs, but that's about it.<

Why are you afraid of acknowledging the segregated nature of FCPS secondary schools?

The numbers are clear.

> As I've shown, your characterization of certain schools as "white" is arbitrary, since there are more schools that are majority-white and even more that are plurality-white. Of course, none of these schools is all-white. Perhaps we should just call them "too white for Thomas" and proceed from there.<

Untrue, I laid out the analysis, explained the margin around the median that the courts have applied in other cases.

Any number of localities have been required to desegregate when their schools had demographic patterns less stark than FCPS.

> So what? There's no requirement that FCPS redistrict and you've pointed to no authority to require it to do so. If you think otherwise, you're mistaken.<

The list of cases is too long to repeat here but it is extensive, including Detriot, Chicago, Boston, Newark and any number of other unitary school disticts

> You apparently define "segregation" as attendance at any school where the demographics do not match the county average as a whole within some unspecified, deviation.<

It's not perception. It's case law.

> My numbers come from the 9/30/10 "Report of Student Membership by Ethnicity, Race, and Gender" issued by FCPS. What's the basis for yours?<

The June 2010 FCPS report. September numbers are notoriously unreliable as any FCPS official would have told you.

But the differences in the numbers are irrelevant because the segregated nature of FCPS are irrefutable no matter which set of numbers are used.

> > > The only schools with 60% or more "white enrollments are Langley, Madison, Oakton and Woodson.<

So you admit that at least 4 schools are segregated in favor of whites.

That's progress.

> > It will still be 15% more white than the County average.<
>
> So what?

It will still be segregated.

> Whether the current boundaries are good or bad, or
could be made more rational, those you have in mind would be even worse.<

Since I've proposed no specific boundaries only the obvious need to redistrict, you have no idea what boundaries I have in mind.

> April 1965 Department of Education Order.

Now, you just making stuff up. First, in 1965, the Federal government had a Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Second, a 1965 Department Order has been superseded myriad times by Federal and state court cases. What page in the Federal Register are we to find this "Order?"

Or are you referencing an "Order" from Harry F. Byrd's government of "massive resistance."

So you don't want in the Va of 1950, you'll take the 1965 version. Good to know.

> No, what this means is that the race-based "solutions" you propose can't be justified as necessary to redress past discrimination.<

And new segregation or resegregation has no remedy.

You may wish that was the law but it is not.

> Most people go into the schools and see a bunch of kids - of considerable diversity - not an "identifiably white, hispanic or African-American high school." <

So they'd see the same thing at Madison High as at Mount Vernon? You really believe that. Or expect anyone else too?

> How is the school system "newly segregated" - all the data would show most of these schools becoming progressively more diverse over time.<

The demographics of Madison and Mount Vernon have been relatively static over time. Not perfectly unchanging but relatively static.

> If you think the school demographics are so offensive, you ought to be advocating for different housing patterns, not devising absurb boundaries.<

Segregated housing patterns are no a defense to segregated schools. That argument has also been tried and failed.

> Anyway, your lame response only underscores the problem. You can't send kids from the area near Stuart to Langley without gerry-mandering the boundaries for Falls Church, Marshall, McLean as well.<

The boundaries of those schools are gerrymandered now.

> Hispanic kids who currently walk to Stuart to have long bus rides to Langley or McLean<

How many kids are walking that mile from Culmore to Stuart?

Is there something intrinsic to Hispanics, in your mind, that make them less tolerant of bus rides than white kids?

> You presume that's what kids who live in Culmore or their families want<

Since you haven't asked them, how would you know?

> The number of white students declined from 93,171 in 1990 to 76,507 in 2010,<

16,664 fewer whites over 20 years. That's 833 each year. Yeah, you're right they are leaving in droves. There's a caravan eastbound on I-66 to Arlington.

Nonsense.

> As noted above, while there may be flaws with the current boundaries, what you propose would be far worse.<

You're afraid to acknowledge the problem and study solutions.

> In doing so, the plurality stated "racial balance is not to be achieved for its own sake" and that "the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."<

There were two pluralities. A 4-4 tie. Kennedy's opinion broke the tie. His opinion is the law. Obviously you know nothing about the law.

Kennedy's opinion specific blessing of boundary adjustments to remedy imbalances is the law.

But you want to perpetuate the current imbalances because even writing about imbalances is "corrosive." We've heard that argument before too. It was called the "gag rule>"

I give the citizens of Fairfax more credit than that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2011 10:38PM by Thomas More.

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WestfieldDad Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------

>
> I did not intend to suggest the West County study
> that excluded Langley from its scope was a model
> of rationality. I agree Langley should have been
> included - not because changing its racial
> demographics should be a goal per se (as Thomas
> wants), but because there are neighborhoods
> assigned to Langley that are close to South Lakes
> and should have been considered if increasing the
> enrollment of South Lakes was considered
> appropriate for capacity reasons.
>

Yes, but you appear to be claiming that the sole criteria for inclusion in a boundary study is capacity. I might be OK with that if that were also the sole criteria used during the study itself. That's not the case.

What is the case is, the board/Staff explicitly requires the public to consider SES/ESOL/... during the public period and in their deliberations. How is it, if SES/ESOL are required to be considered during the public period, that SES/ESOL/... are not explicitly considered when creating the included set of schools in the first place?

Still waiting on your thoughts on the use of 'European-American', Thomas More. I'd like to add that the use of 'Lily white' comes off as poorly as the use of 'Macaca'.

Berdhuis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Still waiting on your thoughts on the use of'European-American', Thomas More. I'd like to add that the use of 'Lily white' comes off as poorly as the use of 'Macaca'.<

Na, "macaca" is more the French North African reverse equivalent of "honky."

As Europe has large numbers of Africans, Asians and other colonial populations, "European Americans" isn't very clear.

Trying to strike a derisively mocking note without being irredeemably offensive.

Maybe even that's not allowed when referring to white people because, you know, they've been treated with such disrespect and been oppressed for so long.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2011 11:13PM by Thomas More.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Berdhuis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Still waiting on your thoughts on the use
> of'European-American', Thomas More. I'd like to
> add that the use of 'Lily white' comes off as
> poorly as the use of 'Macaca'.<
>
> Na, "macaca" is more the French North African
> reverse equivalent of "honky."
>
> As Europe has large numbers of Africans, Asians
> and other colonial populations, "European
> Americans" isn't very clear.

'European Americans' is a better term precisely for the reason you cite - it is more sophisticated, you just chose to describe the term as "isn't very clear". The same sophistication should be used when referring to 'Blacks'. Well, which ones? East Africans, West Africans, Central Africans, descendents of American slaves? Mixed?

In truth, the 'White' people you generally refer to are not monolithic in heritage or culture, nor in ethnicity as you just described.

> Trying to strike a derisively mocking note without
> being irredeemably offensive.

No mockery intended, kind sir.

> Maybe even that's not allowed when referring to
> white people.

Rhetorical, I'll leave it at that.

I think your argument would be stronger if you looked at demographic phenomena in Fairfax County within a framework of Socio-economic factors towards satisfying FCPS goals, and abandoned the use of ethnicity for that purpose.

What do you think of Spanish as a second official language?

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More distortions. Same schools cited multiple
> times

Nope. Different schools added to your list at different times. Whatever strikes your fancy.
>
> I don't have to have set out a full plan on this
> blog. I've set out to prove and have done so
> successfully, with no effective rebuttal from you,
> that there is a need for a broad based
> redistricting of FCPS.

You've done nothing of the sort. You've made a proposal, provided one example (Langley) to support it, and otherwise offered no evidence as to how it could be implemented effectively. I'm less than bowled over.
>
> You've made clear you don't want it and, other
> than defending the status quo boundaries, have
> offered no alternative.

It's not my job to offer an alternative. I'm waiting - apparently like Godot - for you to back up your assertions that a broad-based redistricting could be implemented efficiently and without massive disruptions of the current school
system. Maybe you could change my mind, but not based on what you've offered so far.
>
> > I'm not. I think one could argue in favor of
> changing Langley's boundaries for reasons that are
> not related to changing its racial profile, such
> as reducing the county's transportation costs, but
> that's about it.<
>
> Why are you afraid of acknowledging the segregated
> nature of FCPS secondary schools?

I am very familiar with the different demographic profiles of different schools. I do not consider that segregation, as among other things every FCPS high school has a significant number of students from racial categories that traditionally have been considered minorities, and there are no restrictions on the ability of any racial group to live in any FCPS school district and send their children to that school.

> Any number of localities have been required to
> desegregate when their schools had demographic
> patterns less stark than FCPS.

Give specific examples and we will see what the actual predicates were for requiring changes in the school systems.

>
> The list of cases is too long to repeat here but
> it is extensive, including Detriot, Chicago,
> Boston, Newark and any number of other unitary
> school disticts

It's Detroit, not Detriot.

I'm reluctant to comment on those cases other than to note that it's a huge assumption that whatever some judge ordered for Boston in the 1970s would be viewed as relevant precedent today, given subsequent case law developments.
>
> > You apparently define "segregation" as
> attendance at any school where the demographics do
> not match the county average as a whole within
> some unspecified, deviation.<
>
> It's not perception. It's case law.

Prove it. Let's have specific sites.

>
> > My numbers come from the 9/30/10 "Report of
> Student Membership by Ethnicity, Race, and Gender"
> issued by FCPS. What's the basis for yours?<
>
> The June 2010 FCPS report. September numbers are
> notoriously unreliable as any FCPS official would
> have told you.

The September 2010 numbers are the latest published FCPS data. I'm not aware of any such disavowal of the county's published data. Your numbers were outdated.
>
> But the differences in the numbers are irrelevant
> because the segregated nature of FCPS are
> irrefutable no matter which set of numbers are
> used.

It's clearly refutable. The only thing that irrefutable is that every school's demographics are different and change from year to year.
>
> > > > The only schools with 60% or more "white
> enrollments are Langley, Madison, Oakton and
> Woodson.<
>
> So you admit that at least 4 schools are
> segregated in favor of whites.

No, I acknowledged the demographics of those schools, based on more recent data than you cited. I don't know that the schools "favor" whites any more than your "Hispanic schools" favor Hispanics or your "Black school" favors blacks.

>
> > > It will still be 15% more white than the
> County average.<
> >
> > So what?
>
> It will still be segregated.

You're simply engaging in a tautology to label any school whose demographics do not mirror the county's demographics as a whole, within a few percentage points, "segregated." Sophistry won't score you any points.
>
> Since I've proposed no specific boundaries only
> the obvious need to redistrict, you have no idea
> what boundaries I have in mind.

I can't imagine boundaries that would achieve what you want to accomplish that would not be far more gerry-mandered than the current boundaries, but please enlighten us. Obviously, few would vote for a School Board candidate proposing such a redistricting unless the candidate spelled out how she or he thought the plan would be implemented. Otherwise, it's just a lot of vague words. Why would people necessarily favor the opportunity to attend a school that mirrors the county's demographics as a whole over the opportunity to attend a neighborhood school? People considering where to live don't make that assessment based on how Fairfax, in the aggregate, compares to Loudoun or Arlington; they look at specific neighborhoods and communities.


>
> Now, you just making stuff up. First, in 1965,
> the Federal government had a Department of Health,
> Education and Welfare. Second, a 1965 Department
> Order has been superseded myriad times by Federal
> and state court cases. What page in the Federal
> Register are we to find this "Order?"

U.S. Commissioner of Education, then within Department of the Interior. Prove that its order with respect to FCPS was overturned or superseded.
>
> So they'd see the same thing at Madison High as at
> Mount Vernon? You really believe that. Or expect
> anyone else too?

For the most part, yes. Go the schools and look at the diversity first-hand. You seem to have convinced yourself MV is all black and Madison is all white. You're wrong.

>
> The demographics of Madison and Mount Vernon have
> been relatively static over time. Not perfectly
> unchanging but relatively static.

Wrong again, at least in Madison's case. White percentage down, Asian and Hispanic percentages up, black percentage unchanged. It's more than 10% Hispanic now, which certaintly wasn't the case even a few years ago.

>
> Segregated housing patterns are no a defense to
> segregated schools. That argument has also been
> tried and failed.

Actually, the purported need to respond to the segregated housing patterns is what prompted the Seattle and Louisville plans that the Supreme Court invalidated just a few years ago. Somewhat I suspect a 2007 Supreme Court decision carries more weight than some 1970s district court opinion.
>
>
> > Hispanic kids who currently walk to Stuart to
> have long bus rides to Langley or McLean<
>
> How many kids are walking that mile from Culmore
> to Stuart?

Most Culmore students, which is heavily Hispanic, walk to Stuart. You'd prefer to send them to Langley or McLean, where they'd be screwed if they missed the bus, unlike some middle-class kid from Reston or McLean who has a car or a parent able to drive when needed.
>
> Is there something intrinsic to Hispanics, in your
> mind, that make them less tolerant of bus rides
> than white kids?

It's not intrinsic to Hispanics in terms of genetics, but there may be advantages to a Hispanic kid in Culmore of having community schools nearby, just as the Hispanic families who lived near Graham Road ES overwhelmingly favored keeping that school where it was rather than moved to the Devonshire site further away.
>
>
> > The number of white students declined from
> 93,171 in 1990 to 76,507 in 2010,<
>
> 16,664 fewer whites over 20 years. That's 833
> each year. Yeah, you're right they are leaving in
> droves. There's a caravan eastbound on I-66 to
> Arlington.
>
> Nonsense.

There was a steady rate of decline during a period in which (1) you claim the schools were "favoring" whites and (2) other demographic groups were increasing by considerable numbers. It's more than enough to make any School Board member with a brain hesitate before adopting a proposal that would surely accelerate the current decline in the number and percentage of white students in the county, particularly if the purported goal of the proposal was to redistribute these prized white students throughout the county.

>
> You're afraid to acknowledge the problem and study
> solutions.

Bullshit. I've invited you to identify your solutions. You claim there's a problem and offer no solutions. >

> > In doing so, the plurality stated "racial
> balance is not to be achieved for its own sake"
> and that "the way to stop discrimination on the
> basis of race is to stop discriminating on the
> basis of race."<
>
> There were two pluralities. A 4-4 tie. Kennedy's
> opinion broke the tie. His opinion is the law.
> Obviously you know nothing about the law.

Kennedy broke the tie by agreeing with four other justices that the Seattle and Louisville race-based assignment plans were unconstitutional. No other justice joined in his concurring opinion explaining his particular rationale for doing so, and his reasoning does not have any precedential effect.
>
> Kennedy's opinion specific blessing of boundary
> adjustments to remedy imbalances is the law.

No - it's a concurring opinion in which Kennedy set forth his own thinking. No other justice joined in his opinion and it carries no more weight than the other concurring opinion issues by Justice Thomas. The only thing he did that counts, for purposes of the case, was vote with four other justices that the Seattle and Louisville plans were unconstitutional.
>
> But you want to perpetuate the current imbalances
> because even writing about imbalances is
> "corrosive." We've heard that argument before
> too. It was called the "gag rule>"

Write all you want. But until you can back up your lofty words with specific proposals as to how to address the "problem" you've identified, it's all BS.
>
> I give the citizens of Fairfax more credit than
> that.

Perhaps your thinking is shared by others in Hunter Mill - the same enlightened voters who returned Stu Gibson to the School Board time and time again. Personally, I'm convinced that any School Board candidate who articulated the inflammatory and racist views you've expressed regarding the need to "desegregate the lily white schools" would quickly go down to defeat.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/10/2011 12:05AM by Mozart.

WestfieldDad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Yes, but you appear to be claiming that the sole
> criteria for inclusion in a boundary study is
> capacity. I might be OK with that if that were
> also the sole criteria used during the study
> itself. That's not the case.
>
> What is the case is, the board/Staff explicitly
> requires the public to consider SES/ESOL/...
> during the public period and in their
> deliberations. How is it, if SES/ESOL are
> required to be considered during the public
> period, that SES/ESOL/... are not explicitly
> considered when creating the included set of
> schools in the first place?

One need not be a supporter of the School Board's past actions to oppose a proposal to engage in a broad-based redistricting of the county's middle and high schools to align their racial demographics. Two wrongs do not make a right.

However, to the extent that redistrictings take place, I believe they ought to be driven by the desire to achieve efficiencies within the school system (efficient use of space and transportation resources), rather than the desire to hit racial "targets" at every school within a percentage point or two.

To the extent your question is prompted by the School Board's conduct during the 2008 redistricting (excluding Langley, with its low ESL/FRL stats, from the scope, but then asserting it could properly send kids from Westfield et al to South Lakes to drive down the ESL/FRL stats there), I think a proper focus on the efficient use of resources should have led the School Board not to build an addition at Langley. Had that not occurred, some of the Langley students likely could have been rerouted to Herndon and/or South Lakes in the normal course.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/10/2011 12:12AM by Mozart.

Mozart Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> your assertions that a broad-based redistricting could be implemented efficiently and without massive disruptions of the current school
> system.<

That was never my assertion. Keep propping up those strawmen and knocking them down, if it entertains you.

> Maybe you could change my mind, but not based on what you've offered so far.<

Yours has clearly been a closed mind from the beginning.

> I do not consider that segregation,<

Thankfully you are not the law. Sadly you don't know what the law is and persist in misrepresenting the law here.

> as among other things every FCPS high school has a significant number of students from racial categories that traditionally have been considered minorities, and there are no restrictions on the ability of any racial group to live in any FCPS school district and send their children to that school.<

No such restrictions are required for a finding of de facto segregation. But you wouldn't know that because you don't know or understand the law.

> Give specific examples and we will see what the actual predicates were for requiring changes in the school systems.<

> > The list of cases is too long to repeat here but it is extensive, including Detriot, Chicago, Boston, Newark and any number of other unitary school disticts.<

> It's Detroit, not Detriot.

And I misspelled districts too. You're reduced to correcting typos. That's all you got?

> I'm reluctant to comment on those cases.

Because you've never read any of them.

> other than to note that it's a huge assumption that whatever some judge ordered for Boston in the 1970s would be viewed as relevant precedent today, given subsequent case law developments.<

Again a false implication that anything in any case has invalidated the holdings in those multiple cases.

> Prove it. Let's have specific sites.

I did but you won't bother to read the cases.

> The September 2010 numbers are the latest published FCPS data. I'm not aware of any such disavowal of the county's published data.<

Demonstrating how little you know about FCPS.

> It's clearly refutable. The only thing that irrefutable is that every school's demographics are different and change from year to year.<

Not in any meaningful way for these purposes.


> You're simply engaging in a tautology to label any school whose demographics do not mirror the county's demographics as a whole, within a few percentage points, "segregated." Sophistry won't score you any points.<

Misusing "tautology" and "sophistry." Is American English your native tongue?


> I can't imagine<

That's honest. You're thoroughly lacking in imagination.

> Obviously, few would vote for a School Board candidate proposing such a redistricting unless the candidate spelled out how she or he thought the plan would be implemented. Otherwise, it's just a lot of vague words.<

Electioneering candidates never use "vague words." How long have you lived in this country?

> Why would people necessarily favor the opportunity to attend a school that mirrors the county's demographics as a whole over the opportunity to attend a neighborhood school?<

Explain again how the kids who live across from Chantilly HS but go to Oakton are attending a "neighborhood school" There are no neighborhood high schools in FCPS. What neighborhood has 1400 to 3200 kids?

> People considering where to live don't make that assessment based on how Fairfax, in the aggregate, compares to Loudoun or Arlington; they look at specific neighborhoods and communities.<

You know even less about how people chose to buy houses.

Didn't you write that its the neighborhoods that are segregated not the schools. Which is it?

> U.S. Commissioner of Education, then within Department of the Interior.<

The Commissioner of Education was within HEW in 1965. What page is it in the Federal Register?

So this supposed 1965 Order only referred to Fairfax. Yeah, that has nationwide significance. Not.

And it overrides the cases cited above. Not, again.

> For the most part, yes. Go the schools and look at the diversity first-hand. You seem to have convinced yourself MV is all black and Madison is all white. You're wrong.<

another distortion. another strawman. never said it. never wrote it.

Do you appreciate, even slighty, how totally foolish that sounds?

A 73% white student body is going to look very different from a 25% white student body unless you're engaging in active selective perception or are visually impaired.

> Wrong again, at least in Madison's case.<

So Madison was once even closer to 100% white in the recent past. And that's supposed to rebut the segregated nature of the school?

> Actually, the purported need to respond to the segregated housing patterns is what prompted the Seattle and Louisville plans that the Supreme Court invalidated just a few years ago. Somewhat I suspect a 2007 Supreme Court decision carries more weight than some 1970s district court opinion.<

Seattle was trying to be proactive and Justice Kennedy said they couldn't use the ethnicity of individual students to avoid the segregating school impacts of
a segregated housing pattern.

Justice Kennedy said Seattle could use boundary adjustment and consider ethnicity of neighborhoods to solve the problem of the segregated housing pattern. Since the other 4 (Breyer, Ginsbureg etc.) would have voted to uphold the individual assignment, there can be no doubt that they would vote to uphold boundary adjustments based on the ethnicity of neighborhoods.

Thus Kennedy's opinion is the law going forward.

But you'd have to understand how the law works to understand the significance of Kennedy's opinion which you don't or don't want to.

> Most Culmore students, which is heavily Hispanic,walk to Stuart.<

Numbers. What percentage of Stuart kids walk to school? Do you expect us to believe all the Hispanic kids at Stuart live in Culmore and walk to school.

> You'd prefer to send them to Langley or McLean, where they'd be screwed if they missed the bus, unlike some middle-class kid from Reston or McLean who has a car or a parent able to drive when needed.<

Since F/RL at SL and Stuart are pretty close, why would a SL kid be any more or less screwed in that circumstance.

> It's not intrinsic to Hispanics in terms of genetics, but there may be advantages to a Hispanic kid in Culmore of having community schools nearby, just as the Hispanic families who lived near Graham Road ES overwhelmingly favored keeping that school where it was rather than moved to the Devonshire site further away.<

Why would you assert that Hispanic parents are more desirous of "neighborhood" schools than other ethnicities.

Would you have us believe that Hispanic parents wouldn't want their child to go to TJ if the child qualified?

Exactly from where is your curious understanding of Hispanic parents' preferences derived?

> There was a steady rate of decline during a period in which (1) you claim the schools were "favoring" white and (2) other demographic groups were increasing by considerable numbers. It's more than enough to make any School Board member with a brain hesitate before adopting a proposal that would surely accelerate the current decline in the number and percentage of white students in the county, particularly if the purported goal of the proposal was to redistribute these prized white students throughout the county.<

833 kids out of a system of 175,000. Yeah, the School Board is sweating that. I beat their up all night worrying.

It's called projection. You think everyone else shares your feelings. See someone about it. Its affecting whats left of your limited powers of logic.

There's a whole delusional world of white supremacy in that fetid mind of yours, isn't there?

> You claim there's a problem . . .<

Stop wasting both of our time. Do you deny that there's a problem? Speak plainly. Is there or isn't there a problem.

Or is separate not inherently unequal anymore?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/10/2011 01:09AM by Thomas More.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Stop wasting both of our time. Do you deny that
> there's a problem? Speak plainly. Is there or
> isn't there a problem.
>
> Or is separate not inherently unequal anymore?

Yes, there is a problem. The problem is that the School Board has not made efficient use of the county's limited resources. In some instances, that has led the School Board to build entire schools or additions that were not needed, close schools that should remain open, and establish school boundaries that are not rational.

The response to that problem is to elect School Board members who will insist on the smarter use of limited public funds. It is not to orchestrate a county-wide redistricting, the overarching goal of which is to end up with roughly the same percentage of white, Asian, black, and Hispanic students at every FCPS middle or high school. The latter would be vigorously opposed by most parents and, as actually implemented, would be susceptible to a successful legal challenge. I suggest you take a look at The End of Desegregation? (edited by Stephen J. Caldas and Carl L. Bankston) for a survey of the post-Brown case law that supports that conclusion (and, even more strongly, the conclusion that any challenge to FCPS's current boundaries on equal protection grounds would fail).

If you feel otherwise, please resort to the courts - of public opinion or law. I doubt you will meet with any success, but it would be time better spent than staying up past your bedtime here another night.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/10/2011 10:31AM by Mozart.

I see Louise Epstein has her School Board web site up and running.

Two of her key issues are making more efficient use of the county's limited resources and pushing Langley HS up the renovation queue. No discussion as to whether spending even more money on Langley (after its recent expansion) is an efficient use of the county's limited resources, and certainly no discussion by this Harvard-trained lawyer as to whether a major county-wide redistricting should be undertaken to achieve racial quotas at every school, as Thomas More had incorrectly argued was legally required.

So, either Epstein's priorities are not at all the same as his, or she's not willing to be honest about her agenda. More likely the former than the latter.

Mozart lies again. No one wrote anything about quotas except Mozart.

White supremacy does rot the mind and the voices in Mozart's head could make Mozart believe that was written.

Substitute "parameters" for quotas if you like. Doesn't matter, since neither Strauss nor Epstein have shown the slightest inclination to support either. The passage of additional time only shows how out of touch you were - and are - with what what's of concern to most parents in the county.

facts Wrote:
> You are looking for some vast conspiracy in FCPS
> to discriminate against minorities and it's not
> there. FCPS is bureaucratic, heartless,
> incompetent, and a number of other things, but
> they are not discriminating against minorities in
> any sort of systematic way. If anything, the
> Title 1 regulations assure that for the purposes
> of funding those schools are treated BETTER than
> your so called 'white' schools. That's not to say
> that the SB and administration are in any way
> effective or couldn't be doing a vastly better job
> across all the FCPS population. I think they
> should be removed branch and root. But
> discrimination - not hardly.
>
> In fact, if you did a FCPS-wide redistricting, the
> number of Title 1 schools would decline, since it
> would have the (presumed) effect of evening out
> those populations across all schools. Title 1 now
> at least forces FCPS to do something about your
> 'minority' schools - you don't think FCPS would
> like to eliminate that if they could?
>
> Very few programs over the last 40 years have been
> effective at addressing poverty and poor education
> in minority groups. I think you are looking for a
> silver bullet with a redistricting (which is
> actually a different way of busing when you think
> about it) and it just won't work. Like it or not,
> NCLB at least forced FCPS and it's fellow suburban
> districts to report on what they always were able
> to hide before - low minority achievement. The
> fix for that problem remains undefined.


You are overcomplicating &/or overintellectualizing.
The School Board and staffs dolts are not your intellectual equal.
This boils down to post-modern liberal progressive white guilt.
They have the uber-simplified perspective that mixing it up keeps their white guilt at bay.

The only valid conspiracy pertains to testing and academic achievement gap -> the more they boundary shift, population shift, school composition shift the more they can cover up what is really happening in the ever-growing socioeconomic student population.

You have a formidable mind & insight -> hope it is used to turn voters on to new School Board members across the county.

you are dead wrong about Louise - I've worked with her on many, many school issues --- including the BUDGET - the list of issues she works on is ENDLESS, my friend....I agree with New Generation - I've watched more school board work sessions than I care to admit, and I have even had old Granny Strauss in my house for a meeting with parents - there is no one, and I mean NO ONE, who is more self absorbed and EVIL than that woman. Do us all a favor and vote for Louise....

another Dem. endorsed candidate;
http://reston.patch.com/articles/former-school-board-candidate-glassman-facing-criminal-charges-in-dc

Janie Fan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> BreathofFreshAir Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > We DESPERATELY NEED school board members like
> > Louise Epstein. No one , and I mean NO ONE is
> as
> > well steeped as she is on school issues - I
> > watched her speak a few years ago at TJ - she
> is
> > AMAZING at how much she knows about curriculum,
> > facilities and the budget. She will knock your
> > socks off. If Jane Strauss is reelected, we
> might
> > as well pack up and move - I have watched her
> > screw taxpayers on Gatehouse II, I've watched
> her
> > screw the parents in the Madison Island. And
> what
> > has she done for Langley? Langley PTA had to
> buy
> > toilet seat covers for their school. Springhill
> > Elem has 36 kids in one of their GT classes.
> She
> > told a group of parents if they don't like the
> > overcrowded conditions at Springhill to teach
> her
> > kids Spanish and move to Bailey's Crossroads.
> Had
> > enough?
>
> It sounds like Janie was pointing out that Title I
> schools get extra resources and smaller class
> sizes, and non-Title I schools like Spring Hill
> where rich folks send their kids don't. I don't
> think you can hold her personally responsible if
> you don't like the NCLB Act.
>
> And I agree with the other poster who said Louise
> Epstein is all about protecting programs for
> gifted students and nothing else.


NAILED IT!!@

School board members should not hold the position for life.

It's time to elect school board members who believe that education, not politics, is the most important function of a school district. It's time to elect a school board who is willing to stand up to a bullying superintendent and do what is right for our children. It's time to elect a school board that not only puts children first, but recognizes that children need to BE children.

I support Louise Epstein's candidacy for school board. She has worked tirelessly for all children and I believe she will continue to do so. I will proudly display her signs in my yard and tell as many people as possible about her.

As for posting Eric Strauss' record, that was crass and unnecessary. Eric is an adopted child and has always had special needs. I know Jane and Bill Strauss did the very best they could for Eric...I have first hand knowledge of this as fact. Eric's issues are in no way a reflection of their parenting skills or evidence that they are out of touch with the needs of children. Jane and Bill, both, were a comfort to my husband with their advice and counsel once we learned our son had ADHD, dyslexia, and dysgraphia. Jane's advice, in particular, was invaluable to us at the time and the reason why our son is so successful today. She gave me the foundation to support a special needs child and from there I grew that knowledge base. In this forum, we should address her record as a school board representative, independent of her role as a parent. A candidate's family should never be part of the argument, even if the records are public. Unless you know the Strauss family personally, and clearly you do not or you never would have posted his record, you have no way of knowing the full story behind Eric's behavior.

Still, I believe it is time for Jane Strauss to step aside. She is woefully behind the times and seems, from my recent personal experience with her, too mired in the politics and too unwilling to change. I thank her for her service to our county, but I will never vote for her again.

It's time for a change.

Korinne Jackman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> School board members should not hold the position
> for life.
>
> It's time to elect school board members who
> believe that education, not politics, is the most
> important function of a school district. It's
> time to elect a school board who is willing to
> stand up to a bullying superintendent and do what
> is right for our children. It's time to elect a
> school board that not only puts children first,
> but recognizes that children need to BE children.
>
> I support Louise Epstein's candidacy for school
> board. She has worked tirelessly for all children
> and I believe she will continue to do so. I will
> proudly display her signs in my yard and tell as
> many people as possible about her.
>
> As for posting Eric Strauss' record, that was
> crass and unnecessary. Eric is an adopted child
> and has always had special needs. I know Jane and
> Bill Strauss did the very best they could for
> Eric...I have first hand knowledge of this as
> fact. Eric's issues are in no way a reflection of
> their parenting skills or evidence that they are
> out of touch with the needs of children. Jane and
> Bill, both, were a comfort to my husband with
> their advice and counsel once we learned our son
> had ADHD, dyslexia, and dysgraphia. Jane's
> advice, in particular, was invaluable to us at the
> time and the reason why our son is so successful
> today. She gave me the foundation to support a
> special needs child and from there I grew that
> knowledge base. In this forum, we should address
> her record as a school board representative,
> independent of her role as a parent. A
> candidate's family should never be part of the
> argument, even if the records are public. Unless
> you know the Strauss family personally, and
> clearly you do not or you never would have posted
> his record, you have no way of knowing the full
> story behind Eric's behavior.
>
> Still, I believe it is time for Jane Strauss to
> step aside. She is woefully behind the times and
> seems, from my recent personal experience with
> her, too mired in the politics and too unwilling
> to change. I thank her for her service to our
> county, but I will never vote for her again.
>
> It's time for a change.

Let's recap, shall we? Jane and her late husband help you with your special-needs son and you bide your time until you can trash her on an internet forum, and revive an old thread that had been dormant for over two months, just so you talk about the legal problems of her adopted son (under the pretense that the topic should be off-limits).

All while telling us that we should elect Louise Epstein because she's some saint who doesn't play politics?

The hypocrisy is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Truly Offended Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
...just so you talk
> about the legal problems of her adopted son (under
> the pretense that the topic should be
> off-limits).
>

Just curious cause everyone keeps mentioning it - If you adopt a kid, does that somehow give you a pass if they turn out to be some sort menace to society? I know they weren't born to you, but aren't you agreeing to shoulder the responsibility of raising them if you adopt them?

don't take offense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Truly Offended Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> ...just so you talk
> > about the legal problems of her adopted son
> (under
> > the pretense that the topic should be
> > off-limits).
> >
>
> Just curious cause everyone keeps mentioning it -
> If you adopt a kid, does that somehow give you a
> pass if they turn out to be some sort menace to
> society? I know they weren't born to you, but
> aren't you agreeing to shoulder the responsibility
> of raising them if you adopt them?

Yes, but some adopted kids are clearly more pre-disposed to having problems later in life than others (crack babies, children who were abused as infants, kids from orphanages in Eastern Europe).

Dear Dranesville Voters:

Your School Board representative, Janie Strauss, recently received important endorsements from the two main teachers' unions in Fairfax County:

the Fairfax Education Association

and

the Fairfax County Federation of Teachers

Janie most assuredly deserves the endorsements of these influential teachers' unions since she has spent the last 18 years working hard to help teachers educate our children. Clearly, Janie has the unqualified confidence of the best and brightest teachers in Fairfax County.

You can continue to support Janie by voting for her in next month's election.

Thank you very much for your continued support.


Oops!............. Correction. Sorry about that.


In fact, Louise Epstein recently received important endorsements from the two main teachers' unions in Fairfax County:

the Fairfax Education Association

and

the Fairfax County Federation of Teachers

Louise has never served on the School Board and yet has been endorsed by the teachers' unions. The unions declined to endorse the 18-year incumbent representative, Janie Strauss.

Hey! If you people can't figure out what is going on here in this election, you are too dumb to vote.

Answer to Prior Question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> don't take offense Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Truly Offended Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > ...just so you talk
> > > about the legal problems of her adopted son
> > (under
> > > the pretense that the topic should be
> > > off-limits).
> > >
> >
> > Just curious cause everyone keeps mentioning it
> -
> > If you adopt a kid, does that somehow give you
> a
> > pass if they turn out to be some sort menace to
> > society? I know they weren't born to you, but
> > aren't you agreeing to shoulder the
> responsibility
> > of raising them if you adopt them?
>
> Yes, but some adopted kids are clearly more
> pre-disposed to having problems later in life than
> others (crack babies, children who were abused as
> infants, kids from orphanages in Eastern Europe).

OK - so you're saying one of the reasons above applies to him?

Decided to vote for Strauss, and did already. Epstein supporters are the dirtiest, sleaziest crowd of attention-hungry creeps around.

I am not sure if this is important or not--but I just read through the 2012 budget questions from the school board at the FCPS site.

The only question from Strauss that I could find was written along with Bradsher. Does she ever ask questions from staff???? It seems that that would be an indicator of good stewardship.

TO BOARD DOCUMENTS:

I believe you are referring to the motion and issue they worked on together, which was full expansion of full day K. Bradsher and Strauss had the most schools without the program and had been working for over a year to get the expansion passed.

I don't see that as a bad thing.

You people sure are nasty. You really don't know Strauss or for that matter Bradsher yet you so want to condemn them. For What? Do you get some rush from anonymously attacking those you know nothing about? Sick, really sick people on this blog.

Janie Strauss is a School Board member with 18 years of experience and no positive accomplishments whatever. That's not nasty. It's just the truth and it's unacceptable. She is asleep at the wheel and she needs to realize that it is time to find something else to do with herself. In the private sector, it's calling getting fired.

If, after 18 years in her job, Janie Strauss can't get any of the teacher's associations to endorse her, what does that tell you?

Yes, not only is she asleep at the wheel, she is off in the ditch with the horn blowing. The ambulance is on the way and so is a replacement driver. Finally!

http://redapplemom.wordpress.com/

http://redapplemom.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/fg-official-emails4.pdf

Asian Students are Biggest Cheaters

Washington Post Article from May 2006:

One of Janie Strauss' biggest campaign supporters, Elizabeth Lodal, former Principal of McLean High School, was forced to resign as Principal of Thomas Jefferson High School in 2006 for stating that asian students are the biggest cheaters in the school.

Just so you know, Lodal is one of Strauss' heavyweight backers this time around - again.

If you want more of this, then vote for Strauss.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/02/AR2006050201589.html

As a matter of fact, former McLean and TJ High Schools Principal, Elizabeth Lodal, was in attendance at the School Board debate at McLean High School on Monday September 26.

I assume she will also attend the next debate at The Grange in downtown Great Falls at 7 PM on Tuesday October 25.

It would be interesting to ask Strauss and Lodal at the debate whether they think that asian students in our schools are the biggest cheaters.

Do they think that that's how the asian students get into TJHSST as well - by cheating?

I wonder how many dollars of campaign contributions, like-kind support, and campaign event support like home-parties Strauss has accepted from Lodal. Or, now that this is out, how much money has Strauss accepted from Lodal and subsequently returned?

Someone should ask these questions at the debate.

What does Strauss think about asians cheating in schools in Fairfax County and in Dranesville?

http://www.sungazette.net/mclean-greatfalls-vienna-oakton/politics/epstein-gets-aggressive-in-school-board-debate-with-strauss/article_2da3a340-e9cf-11e0-b0a7-001cc4c002e0.html

This is a pathetic attempt to make an issue where there isn't one. You've tried on three other forums, now on this one. Read the previous responses to your silly insistent posting. And anyone who reads the Washington Post article will see that this is a non-issue.

"Beep . . . I am Robo McLean Soccer Mom Model Lorenze 4000 . . . I have been programmed by the Kingmaker to repeat meaningless posts all over this board . . . Beep."

If, after 18 years on the job, Janie Strauss cannot get the Teachers' Associations to support her, what does that tell us about her? Well, it tells us that she sucks!

Catherine, you have burned many more bridges than you have created. You are toxic and your candidates are already starting to distance themselves from you.

Entertaining and dramatic, yes. Good for the kids, no. Your name is becoming synonymous with sleazy politics locally. You may have to move after the election since I can't imagine anyone wanting to be associated with you after seeing how you have run your campaigns. I hope it was all worth it.

Asian Students are Biggest Cheaters

Washington Post Article from May 2006:

One of Janie Strauss' biggest campaign supporters, Elizabeth Lodal, former Principal of McLean High School, was forced to resign as Principal of Thomas Jefferson High School in 2006 for stating that asian students are the biggest cheaters in the school.

Just so you know, Lodal is one of Strauss' heavyweight backers this time around - again.

If you want more of this, then vote for Strauss.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/02/AR2006050201589.html

As a matter of fact, former McLean and TJ High Schools Principal, Elizabeth Lodal, was in attendance at the School Board debate at McLean High School on Monday September 26.

I assume she will also attend the next debate at The Grange in downtown Great Falls at 7 PM on Tuesday October 25.

It would be interesting to ask Strauss and Lodal at the debate whether they think that asian students in our schools are the biggest cheaters.

Do they think that that's how the asian students get into TJHSST as well - by cheating?

I wonder how many dollars of campaign contributions, like-kind support, and campaign event support like home-parties Strauss has accepted from Lodal. Or, now that this is out, how much money has Strauss accepted from Lodal and subsequently returned?

Someone should ask these questions at the debate.

What does Strauss think about asians cheating in schools in Fairfax County and in Dranesville?

http://www.sungazette.net/mclean-greatfalls-vienna-oakton/politics/epstein-gets-aggressive-in-school-board-debate-with-strauss/article_2da3a340-e9cf-11e0-b0a7-001cc4c002e0.html

I wonder how many times the Lorenze mob has posted that on this board?

Let's find out, shall we?

Search function says *AT LEAST* 17 times.

Kudos, Poison Apple Mom!

After two student suicides, Janie Strauss still claimed that "FCPS does not have a zero tolerance policy." McLean Patch 2/16/2011

Guess what? Strauss voted NO on the FCPS parental notification amendment. FCPS Board Minutes 6/6/2011

One hell-of-a School Board member - Janie Strauss.

After two [face lifts], [Catherine Lorenze] still claimed that "[Her mob of clone candidates] does not have a [frustration problem]." McLean Patch 2/16/2011

Guess what? [Lorenze] voted NO on the [Suggestion that she get another hobby]. FCPS Board Minutes 6/6/2011

One hell-of-a [Poison Apple Mom] - [Catherine Lorenze].

Sighhhhhh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> After two , still claimed that " does not have a
> ." McLean Patch 2/16/2011
>
> Guess what? voted NO on the . FCPS Board Minutes
> 6/6/2011
>
> One hell-of-a - .


This just keeps getting worse. Issues, please.

Sighhhhhh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> After two , still claimed that " does not have a
> ." McLean Patch 2/16/2011
>
> Guess what? voted NO on the . FCPS Board Minutes
> 6/6/2011
>
> One hell-of-a - .


But funny. After all the ugliness on this topic, I needed that. Thanks.

Looks like Epstein is taking some baby steps to create some distance between herself and Lorenze. Check out the comments on this article:

http://mclean.patch.com/articles/mclean-neighbor-profiled-in-the-washington-post

Catherine Lorenze was right there with her at the Kent Gardens Elementary School debate tonight. Louise certainly stepped in it in her lukewarm endorsement of immersion and her insistence that immersion students didn't learn math and science very well. The immersion parents ate her alive.

Why do we in Dranesville pay some of the highest tax bills in the county yet we have some of the largest class sizes?

Because Janie Strauss agreed to send a disproportionately large amount of our taxes to other districts.

Is this what we want? To pay the most taxes and have our kids sit in overcrowded classes?

This is what we get with Janie. This is the way it has always been and when we vote her back into office, this is what we will get going forward.

Janie Strauss is the most hopeless School Board member of all time. She has been in her job for 18 years and still has to borrow tens of thousands of dollars to run against a nubie with absolutely no experience. If Janie had done an even half-way decent job, no one would have even thought to run against her and she wouldn't have to mortgage herself to the wall to stay in this race.

When she loses, maybe Walmart will hire her as a greeter so she can pay back her debts to herself.

Be careful what you wish for. Janie's opponent has major flaws of her own, including being racially biased, mean-spirited, difficult to work with, focussed on the gifted and talented to the detriment of other kids, and in bed with Republicans. Janie might not always meet everyone's high standards and might not always do exactly what you want, but she works hard for our kids and works well with others. She knows the ins and outs of the budget and the schools, experience that would be devastating to lose when so many other School Board members are departing. And she has very good relations with Sharon Bulova and the other members of the Board of Supervisors, which allows her to lobby effectively for our schools and obtain tangible positive results. The same people who work and support Janie will run the other way when they see Louise coming.

Report Year : 2011

Candidates : Strauss Jane "Janie" K
Report Codes : CC20110007(0)
Filing Period : 09/01/2011 - 09/30/2011



CC20110007 Geller Rebecca 8013 Clippenham Ct - Fairfax Station - VA - 22039 campaign strategy services Janie Strauss 9/21/2011 10000

********************************************************************************


Please refer all press inquiries to Rebecca Geller via FairfaxFullDayKindergarten@gmail.com. ...

*********************************************************************************

What a fabulous journey we shared together! This letter is to encourage you to remember to keep our promise.


When writing letters and making speeches, we promised: "we will remember you in November." Now, it is time to fulfill our promise. Please see below the list of 6 candidates who will be re-running and voted in favor of FDK funding.


Janie Strauss - Dranesville

Kathy Smith - Sully

Dan Stork - Mt. Vernon

Patty Reed - Providence

Ilryong Moon - Member-At- Large

Sandy Evans - Mason



Almost 100 years of institutional knowledge departs with 6 school board members as well our Superintendent. Our schools are the "crown jewel" of Fairfax. We must ensure that the remaining 6 incumbents are re-elected to enable a smooth transition this year. Managing a $2.2 billion enterprise requires experience.


*****************************************************************************

Janie pays $10,000 to Geller...and then she (FDK) endorse Janie.

For local Democrats, foot-in-the-mouth "strategist" and "expert" Catherine Lorenze is the gift that keeps on giving:

Democratic School Board Candidates Unanimously Support Needs-Based Funding
Democrats United Following GOP Strategist’s
Controversial Remarks

FAIRFAX - All Democratic-endorsed school board candidates in Fairfax County support a school funding formula that provides added resources to schools with high numbers of at-risk students, so all students get a fair and equitable shot at academic success. The needs-based formula helps Fairfax County Public School students overcome challenges such as impoverished backgrounds, language barriers, little or no computer access, and homes where there may not be a quiet place to study or enough food to eat.

This formula has been in place for several years, has enjoyed bipartisan support, and is a basic foundation for FCPS—one of the most respected school systems in the country.

The Democratic candidates were responding to last Friday’s controversial remarks to the Washington Post criticizing needs-based funding made by a Republican school board election strategist (“GOP strategist shapes Fairfax schools race,” October 14, 2011). Republican Catherine Lorenze, who is advising several GOP school board candidates, reportedly stated that poor neighborhoods in Fairfax “make out like bandits” compared with affluent areas, such as the McLean neighborhood where she lives.

Ilryong Moon, an at-large school board member with 12 years of experience and running for a fourth term, stated, “I have always supported the needs-based staffing formula and will resist any effort to dismantle it. This is about believing every single one of our students should have the opportunity to succeed, even those who have special circumstances that require more educational resources. We need a level playing field. FCPS is a world-class school system that does, should, and must continue performing for all of its students whether in special education, regular education, advanced academic, or ESOL classes or from a well-to-do or economically challenged family.”

A second Democratic-endorsed at-large candidate, Ted Velkoff stated, “I unequivocally support the current FCPS staffing formula that targets extra resources to schools and populations in greatest need.”

Ryan McElveen, another Democratic-endorsed candidate running for one of the three at-large seats wrote on his campaign blog, "The idea that students in an economically disadvantaged part of the county receive increasing school funding is critical to narrowing the achievement gap. I intend to continue the work of our school board to close the gaps inherent in a system that has students from all corners of the economic spectrum."

Current Dranesville school board member and Chairman Janie Strauss told the Washington Post, “If we don’t help the kids who need additional help, we are wasting the minds and talents of many of our citizens.” Strauss added that her top priority if re-elected will be to reduce class size in her Dranesville district which includes McLean, but she made clear she will get it done “without negatively impacting students at other schools.”

“Ultimately, all of society benefits when we provide extra support for those who need it so we have an educated community,” wrote Mason district school board member and candidate for re-election Sandy Evans to her supporters after the remarks were printed. She added that the needs-based formula is critical in her district.

Kathy Smith, the Sully district incumbent seeking re-election stated, "I fully support the needs-based staffing formula which created a cost effective way to meet the requirements of our neediest students. We focus resources where they are needed to help children achieve. My commitment and the commitment of FCPS are to help all children achieve to their fullest potential."

Megan McLaughlin, running in the Braddock district wrote a comment online to the newspaper stating, “I fully support ‘Needs Based Staffing’, which ensures smaller class sizes in our most challenged schools. It is one of the most important methods for narrowing the achievement gap. It's unfortunate that this article creates the impression that it's a zero-sum game; that in order to reduce class sizes in more affluent parts of the county, you have to take teachers away from schools with economically disadvantaged students. Nothing could be further from the truth. I advocate for smaller class sizes, and believe it can be accomplished by having budget priorities that focus on the classroom. As such, FCPS needs to ensure all of its schools have reasonable class sizes so that every child has access to a quality education.”

Patricia Hynes, the Democratic-endorsed school board candidate for Hunter Mill district, expressed her support for needs-based funding. "Denying schools with higher concentrations of poverty the extra resources they need not only hurts the children at those schools. It also hurts the teachers who need that extra support to do their jobs."

The Democratic-endorsed candidate in the Springfield district, John Wittman added, “We need to reduce student achievement gaps everywhere in Fairfax County. By providing additional teachers to those schools with the greatest need, students identified with academic deficiencies have a supplemental opportunity to succeed in our schools, and later in life. Without such consideration, many students will linger in our school system year after year, never achieving to their inner potential. It is a time of constrained resources, but nevertheless we must build our community’s future child by child.”

Lee district candidate Tamara Derenak Kaufax stated, "I find it unfortunate that the vocal critics who claim they want school reform lack an understanding of the many complex and varied needs of all of our diverse student body. To try and pit the needs of one group of students against another is not what we need from our elected officials. I want all children in our public schools to have the skills and knowledge they need to reach their fullest potential. This will be a priority for me in my district and throughout the county."

Mount Vernon incumbent Dan Storck, who is running for re-election, said, "I strongly support the staffing formula, not only having helped develop it and voting for it for elementary and middle schools during my first term on the School Board, but supporting the expansion of it to high schools during my second term. It has made a huge difference in helping to make sure that not only all our students learn the "3 Rs", but that all our students learn other essential 21st Century skills.”

Fairfax County Democratic Committee Chair Rex Simmons said, “Republican election strategist Catherine Lorenze has caustically attempted to divide our community with her elitist, Rush Limbaugh-type comments. She should take back her hurtful words and apologize. Lorenze’s parochial and partisan approach to school board elections is the antithesis of the highly successful ‘Fairfax Way’ of investing in a world class public education system that makes our county a destination of choice for so many of the nation’s best employers.”

Simmons added, “Voters ought to ask school board candidates whether they support a needs-based funding formula for schools with programs that benefit all students or whether they intend to cut resources for at-risk children and put communities at odds with each other. Democrats believe the Fairfax County Public School system is supposed to be world class for all students in the county. We have an obligation to educate all students. And we recognize not all our students enter the race for education quality on equal footing.”

Every Fairfax County school board seat is up for election on November 8, and each voter will have an opportunity to choose a district school board member and three at-large members.

Okay, so the Washington Compost makes their "endorsements". A lot of us vote against their recommendations anyway since we know they almost always support socialists, communists, social engineers, redistributionists, liberal nuts, union hacks, racial dividers, and other social misfits.

The Washington Post is "An Independent Newspaper". Hahahahahahahaha

So what if they endorse someone?

Strauss + Moon = Obama + Biden

all a bunch of dummies

Catherine Lorenze = Louise Epstein = Rush Limbaugh!

Rush? Is That You? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Catherine Lorenze = Louise Epstein = Rush
> Limbaugh!


Epstein should do well with the Tea Party/Rush Limbaugh/Leona Helmsley set. For the most part, they don't live in her district.