Due to overcrowding at South County Secondary School, school boundaries for Hayfield Secondary, Lake Braddock Secondary and South County Secondary Schools are once more in question. All affected communities are invited to two important town meetings -- one is this evening, Tuesday, October 10, and the next is on Wednesday, November 1, at 7:30 p.m., both at South County Secondary School's auditorium.
What’s happening to change it?
The Fairfax County School Board is reviewing at least two possible boundary scenarios: making a traditional boundary adjustment based on geography; or eliminating the middle school from South County Secondary and dividing the middle school population (projected at more than 1,000 students) between Hayfield Secondary and Lake Braddock Secondary Schools based on available seats at each school.
What are the desired outcomes?
- Hayfield Secondary School (HSS) should remain under capacity if boundaries are redrawn to allow for future growth. HSS was well over capacity for well over a decade!
- HSS should remain a balanced, diverse and desirable community school, with only elementary schools in the immediately surrounding neighborhoods feeding the school.
- Students should stay at HSS for all six years of middle and high school. Hayfield and Lake Braddock are secondary schools with carefully planned and separate spaces for middle school and high school populations. A large middle school population and a smaller high school population would be detrimental to the educational quality on both sides of the building.
- Transportation routes and bus ride time MUST be considered during the boundary-setting process.
- The school board MUST consider consequences from DoD’s Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process –– with a potential influx of 20,000 workers at Fort Belvoir over the next four years.
What about these town meetings?
Please plan to attend this evening's (Tuesday, October 10) meeting, and be sure to mark your calendar for the follow-up meeting on Wednesday, November 1. Each meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium of South County Secondary School, located at 8501 Silverbrook Rd., Lorton, VA 22079. The meetings will feature group discussions and breakout sessions so the school board can gather data and info from the affected communities. As parents, residents and voters, you are strongly encouraged to attend and prove to the school board that you have a vested interest in the educational needs of your children and the welfare of your community. That’s why it’s important to be there!
2,729 comments:
1 – 200 of 2729 Newer› Newest»See you tonight!
See you tonight!
See you tonight!
I prefer Option 1 as it retains the demographic percentages at SC.
Everybody is inconvenienced for a longer middle school commute so that everybody benefits from a shorter commute for high school.
Despite what the Crosspointe Crowd (good term!:))says, all of us in SC worked to build this school and we should all reap the benefits of attending there for the high school years.
The facilities team should be sent back to the drawing board. 2A and 2B both leave SCSS over capacity and are not politically feasible. They appear to be red herrings.
All three options are worse than doing nothing at all. Option #1 creates problems in all three attendence areas that are worse than overcrowding and should not receive any further consideration.
The most surprising thing to me at the meeting was that the SCSS crowd is not that unhappy with the trailers and split schedule. They prefer to delay any decision - just like LBSS and HSS. Lon
If the School Board and facilities team want public opinion from all three attendence areas the next meeting(s) should be at Hayfield and/or Lake Braddock.
I would change 2B slightly. All of Silverbrook to Lake Braddock. All of Lorton Station and Gunston to Hayfield. Leave the closest school children in South County.
All of Silverbrook to Lake Braddock, don't think so. The Silverbrook Community is 2 miles or less to South County. Many could walk to the school. Not a good idea!
What I don't want to see is another shady landswap deal as was done for SCSS. There is talk of NOT building a desperately needed elementary school in Laurel Hill and giving the land to developers to finance the middle school coffers.
Interestingly enough, the people who are pushing this deal don't have elementary kids who would be affected by this.
The question for the SCSS community is, "Where do you want your kids to go to school in trailers? SCSS, HSS, or LBSS? If you move kids around they will need to move the trailers also. Gary's numbers have been wrong (attendence numbers have been low and capacity numbers high) for ten years. They are off again now.
It's a consultant's numbers this time, not just Gary's. Option 1 leaves the most room for error at all 3 schools.
Washington Post blogs are up!
Gary and the consultant are wrong. Option #1 is bad for all three attendence areas. The board should take no action until a better analysis can be done.
Washington Post closed the blog! Wonder why?!
If another blog opens up on Washington Post related to SC in any way whatsoever, post a link to this site!
I really "wonder" why the Post shuts the blogs down the minute the comments start pointing fingers at Crosspointe/Barrington (the 2B crowd). Who lives over there that has such pull?
The Washington Post has opened a new blog on the boundary issue. They are calling it the South County boundary study. What an insult, like Hayfield and LB don't matter! This is a study of all three schools and should reflect the best interests of all three, not just one.
And yet again, all the Washington Post morning comments were deleted. Talk about censorship! I wonder if someone in Fairfax Station threatened to sue....
In the meetings last week I found that all three communities (including SCSS) would prefer to leave things alone for now even if it meant the trailers remain at SCSS until a more comprehensive study is done and/or a MS is built. We should all ralley around that option. Gary clearly wants #1 and has attempted to divide the SC community to get it. All three options are bad and worse than doing nothing.
All of Lorton Station and Gunston to Hayfield would not work as there is not enought space at Hayfield -- it was tried before and failed.
I still like Option 2B. More kids from Fairfax Station can go to LB since there are already so many kids from that area in that ss.
Post has new blog up.Under fairfax focus/schools. I would insist the next meeting be at Hayfield or LBSS. You shouldnt allow another schools parents to decide without your input.
Wouldn't having the meeting at Hayfield or LBSS simply alienate the school on the opposite end? I live in Hayfield area and I definitely have an opinion on what option I think is best for the study. However, driving to LB is a big pain in the you-now at that time of the day.
Does Dave Albo actually think the Army is going to give FCPS land for a school? See today's Laurel Hill Connection. He needs to be voted out of office. What a nut!
The auditorium at SCSS was not large enough to accomodate the crowd that showed and the next meeting will have a larger crowd. Too many people were standing in the aisles and some could not get in.
The LB and HF communities were alienated at SCSS. I think they (I would anyway) prefer to drive to LB or HF than to return to SCSS.
There should be two more meetings. One at Hayfield and one at Lake Braddock. SCSS may be centrally located, but to get a comprehensive view you need to visit the other schools.
Once again the Post closed the discussion. I didn't see anything posted that warranted the closing. What am I missing?
Post is up again-must be a game of theirs. The names on the entries are susiciously changed by the end of the day sometimes. Why is the Post doing this?
On the Albo article- he is defintiely pro-developer. Give land to his buddies to develop, and they'll give SC a new building.He mentions Midtown and the Mall too- how is that related to a school at the south end of town?
He was stumping for Davis
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fairfaxfocus/2006/10/south_county_school_boundary_s.html
Above is the link to the post blog.
We should all be writing to writing to Woody Irvin (the Post reporter who wrote the blurb to the blog) to see why the Post closed and then reopend the blog. I read the comments off and on all day at work and found nothing offensive. There is criticism of FCPS but nothing that warranted the closing. I think he lives in Silverbrook...:)
Albo remarks are being scrutinized by our whole community. Seems he really blew it with his errant comments.
Does anyone here believe we need to fill unused newly renovated space before we sink money into a new middle school?
Having lived through the WSHS boundary review, I find it interesting that parents are willing to choose option 1. The crowd that wanted into WSHS kept using the argument that all their kids friends would move on to WSHS while their kids went to Lee. Admittedly the crowd moving on to Lee is smaller than what we're talking about with SCSS. Nevertheless I think it would be hard to be in a secondary school setting knowing that you were not moving on to the HS. Option 1 doesn't really seem to have the best intesest of the students at heart.
Option 1 is the fairest way to keep the SC boundaries the same. If F&P and the School Board prefer 2A or 2B, I think they should consider which neighborhoods actually contribute the most to SC and which neighborhoods were instrumental in getting South County funded and built.
Hello
Once again this discussion turns to what is best for South County and who is entitled to this new school. This boundary change effects two other schools whose combined population dwarfs South County. It is not just about the kids at South County but also what the makeup is at Lake Braddock and Hayfield Secondaries. I believe Option 1 will adversly effect the most students. Options 2a and 2b, while not ideal, distrups the least amount of students.
2A and 2B are good to a point but they don't redistrict enough kids into Hayfield and Lake Braddock.
F&P needs to add a couple of more neighborhoods into these studies.
For Study 2B, I would suggest more Silverbrook neighborhoods be added to get redistricted to LB o Study 2B.
For 2A, Triple Ridge and the section of Crosspointe north of Silverbrook, West of Hooes should be added to the Newington Forest redistricting.
For the Hayfield side, I would suggest ALL of Lorton Station get redistricted to Hayfield.
Option #1 is only fair because it treets everyone bad. It creates pain and spreads it around. Fair does not make it good, it is still bad.
2A and 2B don't get SC below 100% and need modification. I might agree with the person above, but I am concerned those moves would place Hayfield and/or LB over capacity again. Need to check the numbers. It might work with some redistricting of the elementary schools.
We are trying to put 10lbs of sugar in a 10 lb bag. We don't have that much room to play with. I would like to see this action delayed. We have the McKibbon study now, so we can include more attendence areas and have some more advanced options.
#1 is just bad all around.
Someone asked "Does anyone feel the need to feel unused space before we build a MS?
I do not feel that it is important to fill the space first. It is important to consider capacity, but traffic, driving times, and the impact of split feeders on education, and diversity are important criteria as well.
The capacity numbers used have have a history of being unreliable so it is difficult to trust them now. They appear more credible now, but I am still skeptical. Those numbers also tend not to cover common areas such as cafeterias and gyms adequately. There is additional capacity at HF but it is not extensive and wasteful. It is not flexible enough to handle 500 Middle School students effectively.
The area of Tripleridge has a high rental population. How about moving them into Sangster/LBSS pyramid?
It would have temporary impact on those military families that move on anyway, and it could relieve the massive overcrowding at the elementary schools that feed into SCSS.
I do feel it's important to fill the unused space before wasting taxpayer money on a unnecessary school.
People keep talking about traffic and driving time but Robinson and Langley both have multiple bus routes that are much longer in both time and distance than even the westernmost Silverbrook area to Hayfield. Why don't we see Herndon residents clamoring to attend South Lakes or Herndon High Schools? Either of those schools are much closer to these neighborhoods than Langley.
BTW, there are Fairfax Station neighborhoods that are within the current LBSS boundaries that are located further away from LB than the Silverbrook or Newington Forest communities.
Barrington and South Run Oaks are both closer to Sangster than Crosspointe and TripleRidge.
Barrington and South Run Oaks are further from South County than Crosspointe and Triple Ridge.
If any neighborhood should be redistricted to Sangster and LB, it should be Barrington and South Run Oaks.
It sounds like there are many problems with driving times and boundaries. We need a county wide study that includes time and distance as one of the criteria and stop this limited area version.
It should also include the opinions of the educators as at least equal to fp. The opinions of the educators should be public.
It would never be good to waste taxpayer money and it would never be good to purchase an unecessary school.
We should insist on spending $ effeciently and effectively. FP and educators should have a long term vision. We will eventually need a MS in SC so we should plan for it now and minimize the taxpayer $ bussing kids all over the county.
Busing kids to adjacent schools is hardly "busing kids all over the county." It's not as if we're sending them to McLean or Herndon or haha, Langley.
Fix the feeders and the overcrowding at SCSS will be fixed. Bussing is a non issue thanks to the millions of taxpayer $$ and a consultant all to happy to take it.
Lets get realistic and use the space..even if it means sending some to another pyramid.
Once again the Washigton Post closed the blog due to heavyhanded censorship. I suppose that freedom of the press only applies to their journalists.
Be careful that you don't drink the "excess space" kool aid. It sounds too good to be true because it isn't true.
There is some space, but it is not that flexible. It is split between Middle Schools and High Schools. FP combined the numbers for simplicity, but it is not that simple.
The space available is classrooms, not common space (cafeterias, gyms, bathrooms).
We are bussing kids all over the county. Take a look at the boundaries and you will see that several HS are on the edge of the boundary. If they were more central to their population bus driving could be significantly reduced.
Refer to this memo from G Chevalier to L Smyth, BOS Providence for a different area of the county. However, this document gives insight into the possible disparities between CIP official capacities and operational capacities. Chevalier states that offical core capacities do not exist but they review the ability of the support areas to accomodate students. This review seems subjective and can become political. Maximum capacities are done via a state ratio based on square footage:
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/providence/PDFFiles/FairleeStudySchools.pdf
The Washington Post does not seem to cover the issues in Fairfax County as in depth as it does those in Montgomery County. I remember a POst article on an undercapacity school in Annapolis yet the Post did not also address this issue closer to home in Fairfax. In the 1980's FCPS closed a high school and created West Potomac at Groveton. The closed high school, Fort Hunt, became Sandburg Middle School.
We now have middle schools that can be consolidated and turn one into an elementary school. This would have excellent science labs and IMHO could result in Glasgow being 7 and 8. This is not in your area.
Option 1 creates an imbalance for middle and high school and if you go the FCPS homepage you will see the Jackson MS kids in a photo prepping for Falls Church HS homecoming. Not a good photo if you are a school system proposing sending kids out of their pyramids.
Note FCPS is putting a GTCenter at Jackson. Where do Hayfield base school kids go to GTC?
Maybe now the post is opening a new blog titled "Hayfield - Lake Braddock- South County" boundary study?
Hayfield GTC is Mark Twain (for MS) and Springfield Estates (for ES).
I really believe that Option 2A or 2B with a minor adjustment would be the best solution. It returns some kids to Hayfield for the 6 years but keeps a lot of excess space to allow for BRAC.
However, in terms of the SC to LB side of those 2 options, more kids need to be redistricted to LB. Just like Hayfield, SC may be impacted by BRAC so F&P needs to create bring SC undercapacity.
For 2B, I would suggest all of Silverbrook ES be redistricted to LB, not just the part north of SB Rd.
For 2A. I would recommend that South Run Oaks and Barrington be added to Newington Forest for redistricting consideration.
What do the numbers look like for sending all of Silverbrook to LB? How about adding South Run Oaks and Barrington option 2A? None of this means anything without actual numbers. Perhaps you could get the numbers from Gary?
Don't forget to go to the Silverbrook Community meeting to provide input and gain information as to what should happen to South County in regards to the Silverbrook community. It is scheduled for 10/26 at Silverbrook Elementary at 7 pm.
The post blog is back up (1400 10/20). I think they take it down and change the names when people are using multiple personalities and blogging themselves. :)
Will the Silverbrook community welcome HF and LB folks at the meeting?
I believe school board members will be at the Silverbrook community meeting. I more then two board members are present then it is supposed to be advertised as an official meeting I think. I have not heard which school board members are schedule to attend. Does anyone know? As far as welcoming HF and LB folks I would not expect a problem, it is a public meeting in a public building. Just leave your pitch forks and tourchs at home.
2:06 Is anyone really that crazy on the WP blog that there are split personalities? I know this is stressing out all 3 communities but still!
I think all people involved in this study should be attending this meeting on Thursday whether or not they live in the Silverbrook area. NonSilverbrookers can just go and not voice opinions but at least we'll get an idea of their game plan.
I don't really think it's appropriate to attend a community meeting when you're not a memeber of the community!
I would like to attend, but only if they welcome it. I don't want to be in an altercation.
We are all striving for the same thing, but there is much emotion.
What are they going to do? Ask to see a bill/lease/mortgage like you do to get a library card?
Silverbrook is a huge school. They can't possibly know everyone in every subdivision.
I don't care if they know I am from Hayfield. We are all in the larger community, and I think we can be adults about this. If elected officials are attending then the "community" is all of us county citizens. If they want a private meeting then they need to have it on private property not a public school.
Good point. I think I am going to make an extra effort to attend.
Good point. I think I am going to make an extra effort to attend.
Good point. I think I am going to make an extra effort to attend.
It is posted on the FCPS website for all to see for a reason. I think I will go and be nice.
http://www.fcps.edu/schlbd/requests.htm
Following are events to which three or more School Board members may have been invited and at which school system business may be discussed:
Oct
26 South County Area community meeting, Silverbrook Elementary School cafeteria, 7:30 p.m.
Silverbrook community doesnt want to be moved at all, thts their game plan.Move everyone else. They are going to present every possible option with smoke and mirrors to distract from the obvious problem of overcrowding.
According to the Post blog, FCPS has the meeing notes online.
See you tonight!
make sure you let us know what happens tonight!
Why wasn't Brad Center representing Hayfield at the meeting last night? Tessie Wilson (Braddock District) was in attendance as were others.
I went to the Silverbrook community meeting last night and here is what I took from that meeting.
Silverbrook is very organized (no surprise) and was able to get half the school board and county supervisors to attend, as well as Tom Davis. The meeting was very civil and very well presented with speakers touching on several points that they wanted to get across. The major point being that none of the three options presented by facilities is acceptable. Option 1 treats the 7th and 8th graders as "ping bong balls" bouncing them around from school to school and not allowing the kids get a sense of school pride knowing they will be bouncing out in a couple years. At this age, not a good thing. A Hayfield parent questioned the Board members about this option and what the feedback from the professional educators was and they answered that none of them liked it.
As to Options 2a and 2b, the Silverbrook community is deadset against spliting Silverbrook. It is understandable that they are passionate especially about option 2b which would split off the North-Western neighborhoods of Silverbrook and send them to LBSS. Because this was a Silverbrook community meeting most of the concern and questions were directed at shooting down option 2B which I suppose should have been expected, but very little was said about option 2A that it makes me wonder if the Silverbrook community leaders are throwing Newington Forest under the bus.
Liz Bradsheer was asked to give a little history of how SCSS came about which, when finished, she received a standing ovation. That was nice, but I think a better use of that time could have been spent on the issues and questions for the officials present rather then a pep rally for Liz.
The next point made by a couple of community speakers is that LBSS does not have the room to absorb the Silverbrook numbers. Again nothing said about option 2A which would send Newington Forest kids to LBSS which is understandalbe at a Silverbrook meeting. The main thrust of these speakers was to point out that the Facilities projections for LBSS are wrong this year and that the Capicity is not as large as the County says because the "Core capacity" is not taken into account. Later in the meeting Mr. Tistadt(sp?) disputed the numbers presented but he was going to look into the "Core Capacity" issue and have some numbers at the 11/1 meeting. Hopefully he includes HSS in that research. Anyway the bottom line message was that LBSS, does not have as much room as they say and that LBSS will be crowded if Silverbrook is split off and sent there.
Another major thrust of the meeting is the need of a new Middle School in South County, and there is some powerful support to get it done. Supervisor Hyland spoke in support of working to get it done and Elaine McConnell was on board to get it done as well. Mr. Hyland made it plain, however, that this is something that the School Board has to decide to do but if they do, he supports getting it done. Congressman Davis showed up and also spoke to this point of building a new school and it is apparent that he is up on the issue and supports getting it done. Now that is some heavy weights weighing in on building a middle school. Not to be outdone, Dave Albo, not only supports getting a new school but is on a task force to explore doing another Private/Public partnership to get it built. Again he made it clear that it is the School Board that must give the go ahead to build a new school. A question came up about how long it would take to build a school, and that was answered by the Facilities Superintendant Mr. Tistadt who said it would be 4-5 years at least if they got the go ahead today.
By far the biggest message I got from the official panel, speakers and audience, is that this boundary change at this time should be delayed or tabled. Two many unknowns such as BRAC, the yet to be completed McKibbon Study, and the accuracy of Facilities' projections all could lead to another poor decision by the Board.
I think some on the board are for delaying any action at this time but they need to hear it from the community. One statement from the audienced noted that the dual schedule at SCSS is working out well and she actually liked it. I came away thinking the Silverbrook can live with the status quo as long as the board plans to build a Middle school sooner rather then later.
Thanks
Hope the summary is informative.
I agree with 8:44 am
Officials at the meeting:
Supervisors McConnell and Hyland
Delegate Albo
Rep. Tom Davis
School Board
Wilson
Kory
Storck
Belter
Hunt
Oleszek
Very well attended by the Silverbrook community. They seemed to welcome others as well. They clearly have the support of the political officials.
If hayfield parents need the politicians to listen, they too should hold a meeting..it is afterall, an election year. Not too hard to make these wonderous "I'm on board!" statements to get elected. It is the schoolboard that makes the decision, not those others looking to keep their seat.
I thought the only SB member with any backbone was Steve Hunt. He was the only one who said the obvious: 1 vastly overcrowded secondary school shares boundaries with 2 secondary schools that are both undercapacity. It is a waste of taxpayer money to build a middle school before using the excess seats.
The SB terms expire December 2007 so their next election is not next month. I will certainly consider their action on the HF-LB-SC Boundary study when I vote next year.
The SB members work long days at their regular job and serve on the board because they care. They are good people trying to do a good job, but we need to hold them accountable.
None of the current options work for anyone so FP must try again. We gave the Board an "out" last night as most of us in attendence would like to see any action delayed for now. That would allow them to make this decision after the election. The SC people there were ok with staying in trailers until a MS is built as long as it is sooner rather than later.
1:27 Mr. Hunt did not say that nor did anything he said even imply that. Please do not put words in his mouth.
In reality, SCSS has at least three pyramids with undercapacity schools on its borders. However, 1) the capacity in those pyramids is not large enough nor flexible enough to properly educate the SCSS population and 2) the transportation network is insufficient to get the kids to school on time.
To Anonymous, 8:44 a.m. -- thank you VERY much for your concise and informative summary from last evening's Silverbrook meeting!
Anonymous, 8:44 a.m. -- may I elevate your excellent summary of the Silverbrook meeting as a new entry on FB 2.0 blog itself? You've presented the facts/events in a neutral fashion, and since I couldn't attend the meeting, I would really like to publish an update with the Silverbrook meeting info, emphasizing that the school board needs to TABLE this issue for now. You can contact me through the blog...thanks.
i was at the meeting and although Hunt wasn't as blunt as 1:26 implied, he did say something needs to be done as a stopgap until when and if a middle school is funded. he did talk about excess seats at lake braddock and hayfield. sc is at 120% too many students and he said this is not good.
Va State of Mind.
Please do post my summary comment. Could you check my grammar, I was typing free flow thoughts off the top of my head so some those thoughts may have run on a bit.
I also will note that someone on the panel, forget who, said that some type of compromise option may result from this process. Would any of you bloggers venture to guess what that may be.
My guess is that they would do something to take pressure off SCSS, like sending some of the less vocal communities to LB and Hayfield. Not drastic enough to take SCSS below 100% nor enough to make HF and LB scream. But something to use some of the alleged "excess capacity" at HF and/or LB, relieve some of the pressure from SCSS, and do something politically feasible.
Is that really "fair" to send the less vocal communities vs the ones who are organized? According to an email I received that recounted of the meeting,the issue of "fairness" was brought up by a Crosspointe dad. His thing was that it is only "fair" to let the communities that contributed the most to the SCSS funding/building stay in SCSS over other communities.
Is that really "fair" to send the less vocal communities vs the ones who are organized? According to an email I received that recounted of the meeting,the issue of "fairness" was brought up by a Crosspointe dad. His thing was that it is only "fair" to let the communities that contributed the most to the SCSS funding/building stay in SCSS over other communities.
Just heard on WJLA News 7 that some kind of new ID system is going in place for students that can be accessed by more than just the school. How is it that I haven't heard about it sooner by the school/county than just now on the news? It is no wonder that this boundary issue has exponentially morphed into some kind of a Twilight Zone episode.
Putting this study on hold does not meet any of the objectives for the study. Did the schoolboard actually decide to have this, wait until October to start the study just to "put it on hold" until the middleschool is built?
HOW does this help my student who attends the grossly overcrowded school? Where is their responsibility to MY student?Where is their responsibility to the taxpayers? Why must we settle for trailers in this county?
8:19 put your statement on the washington post blog.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fairfaxfocus/2006/10/south_county_school_boundary_s.html
None of the options presented so far meet the objectives of the study effectively. It is better the students stay where they are than to jerk them around and around until we can figure this out.
SCSS should not have to settle for trailers. That community was part of the Hayfield pyramid before and was in trailers there for over 15 years. They worked hard and broke down barriers to get that school and all of the surrounding schools were finally, after two decades of over crowding in schools without trailers.
They learned that if they waited and stayed quiet they would not get a school and remain driving long distances to go to school in a trailer. If they organize, work hard, and don't take no for an answer they cold succeed. They will do it again and get a MS.
It isn't fair to send the less vocal communities, but it is reality. That is why we are pushing our community to stand up and speak out.
As a taxpayer, I do have a problem with the way the SCSS construction pushed ahead other major projects on the CIP. The Woodson renovation was delayed for 3 years due to diversion of funds for SC. A trailer is definitely not an ideal classroom space but neither are falling ceiling tiles in an old school.
10:54- so, moving from a trailer at hayfield(recently renovated to accomodate you inside a brand new school) to a trailer at SCSS is OK because its in your neighborhood?
No. It isn't OK. It shows an incredible lack of responsibilty with taxpayer funds, and with our students. They have the money and the facilities to provide these kids a great environment and education.We can not allow them to put kids in trailers. It is completely unacceptable.
How about moving Gunston back to HF and leave the rest of it alone for now? We could then learn the real impacts of the LB renovations before moving SB or NF (or not). Granted, SC would still be OC, but it would take some of the pressure off and eventually provide HF the HS students it needs.
9:21 I wonder how the Gunston folks feel about that idea, I have yet to hear any voices from these folks. I may be mistaken but isn't Gunston split fed now to HSS and SCSS with the Mason neck kids going to SCSS? Last I heard it was around 80 kids from Mason Neck that goes to SCSS. That would hardly relieve much pressure at SCSS.
The last boundary meeting and at the Silverbrook meeting I kept hearing the phrase "Core communities" when reference was made to SCSS. I believe this is phrase to indicate that the Halley, Silverbrook, and Newington Forest feeder schools are the deserving, or "fair" (is the word fair used in replace what many think "entitled" is a better description) solution schools that should be at SCSS. Does this once again come down to a battle over Lorton Station being allowed to go to a school that is just about the same distance to SCSS as parts of Silverbrook. Bottom line to relieving crowding in SCSS I think it comes down to Newington Forest or Lorton Station. One or both will have to go cause I just don't see the powers to be having the political will to split Silverbrook. Then again that is also a good reason to believe they may just table it and do nothing for now.
Once again the post closed the boundry blog. I recommend we get the word out that this is the blog to converse on. The post can't handle the opinions folks have on this issue.
The thing about Silverbrook is they are in a relatively weak postition despite their organization. Their SB Member, Cathy Belter, is quite ill according to the Connection and will not be running for re-election in 07. The other thing is that Silverbrook communities vote overwhelmingly Republican and Belter is a Democrat.
Moving Mason Neck and Lorton Station won't take care of the OC problem by itself. Make no mistake, if push comes to shove, Newington Forest will be shoved out to ensure that SC stays in.
There is a link on the Post blog in the beginning of the forum. If the Post reopens the blog, we need to mention this site again and again as a place where we won't be censored.
How about Newington Forest to Hayfield?
or NF to Lee and Saratoga to Hayfield.
Lesson one- you can't build a community school before the community is built.
SOLUTION: leave a buffer to accomodate the completion of the comunity OR stop the building..Gov. kaine got involved with Dulles development this way.
Lesson two- dont waste bond money on renovating schools, just to evacuate them.
SOLUTION: use the created available space or lose taxpayer and Supervisor confidence.
Lesson three- stay alert to these politicians, it is when you aren't looking that most of this went on.
SOLUTION: Election 2007!
If you look at the maps that were handed out in the 1st meeting and compare Option 2A to 2B, it is more logical to redistrict the Silverbrook communities that are highlighted as compared to Newington Forest. This is the 2B option.
hmmmm,
Lesson 1 is false. You can build a school first and a community around the school, or you can do them at the same time. In the case of SSSC the school came later, but it could have come first.
Lesson 2 Good point! We have kept this from happening so far and I am confident all will be fine in the future. The renovations at HF were well worth the money and are being used effectively. It appears the same will be true for LB, but we will need to wait a year or two to judge. After that, maybe some adjustments can be made as will be made at HF. HF can take on more HS kids and probably will soon, but all is not lost if we wait a year or two.
Lesson 3 is true for all politicians and people. SCSS was built at reduced cost, HF was renovated and providing a great education, LB is being renovated and will open soon, and hopefully a MS in SC in 5 years. Looks like they are doing a fine job to me.
Lesson 4: Analyze and question all data presented to ensure you understand the facts and assumptions.
Solution: Drive the bus routes and eat in the school cafeteria.
I agree that 2A is more logical than 2B, but it is still bad. To have good options they need to include more attendence areas.
I think we should all now agree that Option #1 should be taken off the table.
Basing on what 1:44 said, 2A (redistricting Newington Forest is LESS logical than 2B (redistricting Silverbrook.
This is a link to the South County student newspaper which describes conditions resulting from the schedule:
http://my.highschooljournalism.org/va/lorton/scss/opinions.cfm?eid=6146
Please read the various items to see what it is actually like for the high school students. I don't see why any school administrator would object to students hanging out in the library. I went to a large diverse public high schol and the libraries (both public and private) were great.
Lake Braddock only has 33 ms and 232 hs seats open based on Sept 2006 enrollment. However, there are 255 ms gtc so the actual in boundary ms enrollment is not known.
If Lake Braddock was complete now FCPS would have a surplus of renovated capacity between these three contiguous secondary schools of 658 seats with H 920, LB 265, SC -527. LB in-boundary might even be higher since it has some SC MS GTC. Therefore in-boundary for SC is underrepresented on Chevalier's numbers.
Option 1 should be thrown out as well as Option 2A. 1 It wastes transportation resources. Moving Newington Forest (any walkers to SC?) is not responsible geographically and should be estimated at 100 kids per grade level. Also lower density areas attending Halley intersect with LB attendance area.
4:06 and anyone else concerned with the potential waste of taxpayers' dollars:
PLEASE write to all 12 School Board Members (not just your own), Gary Chevallier, Dean Tistadt, Jack Dale and ALL the Board of Supervisors! BTW, you might as well add Dave Albo and Tom Davis since they clearly have the time for Silverbrook residents.
Additionally, write letters to the editor to the Community Times, the Connection, the South County Chronicle etc.
The blogs are great but the powers that be need to see names (read voters) behind these opinions.
10/29/2006 4:06 PM in your comments about not Moving Newington Forest because they are walkers, and that option 2b is better, is not true. Silverbrook is close or closer than Newington Forest. I feel splitting a community and creating split feeder school is not the best option.
To 4:06 and 4:49:
Perhaps ALL of Silverbrook should attend LB? Then there is no split feeder issue.
The schoolboard isnt worried about splitting a neighborhood.They have a school that will be 1000 over capacity. They have vacancies in the schools next door.
The argument of no seats to accomodate "all of us" at LBSS is bunk. Send those that will fit.
This is serious. Silverbrook is not thinking of their STUDENTS best interest. It is all about Mommy and Daddy.
LBSS and Hayfield can take students to abate the overcrowding. Stay on task.
HF has room and could use some High School and MS students (not just MS).
We will not know how much room LB really has until school is in session next year. How about the bottom half of 2A/B this year and let SB and NF fight it our next year?
Or
Saratoga to HF and NF to Lee? Yea I know they weren't in the study, but who's looking?
How about drawing all new boundaries for Silverbrook, Halley, Newington Forest, and Lorton Station? That would be fun!
Silverbrook is 200+ kids OC and Halley is UC. Redistrict some more Crosspointe Silverbrookers to Halley letting then stay at SC. Then send ALL within the new Silverbrook to Lake Braddock.
Lorton Station is also overcap and NF is right AT cap. Laurel Hill needs the elementary school (LHES). We cannot let the BUILD THE MIDDLE SCHOOL TOMORROW crowd to continue to advocate selling the LHES land to finance the middle school.
How about redraw Halley to include more of Lorton Station and then send all of Lorton Station to Hayfield?
How can Silverbrook's overcapacity issue be solved? They are closer to Halley than LS AND they are in the same neighborhood.
10:13 I think you just hit on what will be the compromise after all is said and done. Noone will be sent to LBSS because of the political pressure from Silverbrook. That school will remain undercapacity while Hayfield will be where the school board wants it. Lorton Station is just as close to SCSS as the neighborhoods of Barrington South Run Oaks and the woods at South Run. Frankly if you took it down to the Elementary School level they could relieve crowding at Silverbrook Elementary and send those neighborhoods over to Sangster which is undercapacity I believe. Sangster feeds LBSS so you kill two birds with one stone, however it still would be not enough to get SCSS under capacity. I kept hearing about how dangerous Lee Chapel Rd. is, What is that about? I have been on that road hundreds of times and it is just like any other secondary rd. in this county. I am not sure why this road is any more dangerous then any other. However if it is so bad, why not propose another cut through road across the South Run Rec center property. That would give more direct access to these neighborhoods. I know that is a crazy suggestion and would never happen but hey this is just a blog. I also think at the very least they should let the Mason neck kids stay SCSS, there are so few of them that it won't make much of a difference.
Why didn't FCPS consider sending Saratoga to Hayfield? Now there is a School Board task force accessing the McKibben demographic study. Each SB member appointed someone except there is possibly no one from Jane Strauss. That's the Dranesville District [Langley, Herndon, Mclean areas] which also serves some Stu Gibson constituents from Hunter Mill. I think FX county needs an expanded task force with increased membership that also incorporates a review of the transportation study. Such a group should look at all boundaries, compare actual core facilities [not done on CIP], develope new boundaries, and include financial projections for bonds, debt service, the operating budget, and henceforth property taxes. They would also examine special program costs and locations for the greatest operating efficiency of this county wide school system. It's the perfect time to use this type of task force since the school board is spending over 300,000 on consultants.
For those who don't know the LB boundaries, there are many neighborhoods in Fairfax Station that already are in the LB boundaries. These communities are further away from LB than Crosspointe/Barrington etc. What makes Silverbrook residents so special that they can't "risk" their kids travelling on Lee Chapel?
7:42
Well said, and I agree. However, what I think your proposing is a County wide study of boundaries for all Schools. I think McGibbon even suggests that is needed but I wonder if it could ever be politically possible. Has it ever been done? Look what we are going through in this one corner of the county, can you imagine the uproar a county wide boundry adjustment would cause. As far as Saratoga is concerned, It would be great to have them at Hayfield, but not likely since that gets Lee involved and does nothing to relieve the overcrowding at SCSS.
Your right though, if I remember from two years ago moving Saratoga to Hayfield was not even considered in any of the options.
7:42
Well said, and I agree. However, what I think your proposing is a County wide study of boundaries for all Schools. I think McGibbon even suggests that is needed but I wonder if it could ever be politically possible. Has it ever been done? Look what we are going through in this one corner of the county, can you imagine the uproar a county wide boundry adjustment would cause. As far as Saratoga is concerned, It would be great to have them at Hayfield, but not likely since that gets Lee involved and does nothing to relieve the overcrowding at SCSS.
Your right though, if I remember from two years ago moving Saratoga to Hayfield was not even considered in any of the options.
A county-wide study was done in the mid 80s when all the SB were appointed. One of the SB members told us at the first H-SC studies 2 years ago, that a countywide study would never happen because they would all get voted out by disgruntled voters.
Quite frankly, the decisions that were made in the first study and in this one so far aren't exactly endearing the SB members to the voters.
Option #1 is bad for everyone and Options 2A and 2B are too drastic to accomplish politically. I think that some minor boundary changes that relieve the pressure off SCSS and provide HF with some HS students will be sufficient for now.
I also think that if they look at the elementary schools and do some minor moves there it will help the long term. Some of the suggestions like "some of SB to Sangster" and those sort of things will have small impacts that add up over time.
Both Halley and Silverbrook are in the Crosspointe subdivision. No kid who is currently in the Silverbrook boundary would have to be on a major road to get to Halley. It makes more sense to send Silverbrook kids to Halley than to Sangster. You're dealing with the Lee Chapel issue if you send Silverbrook to Sangster. Besides who wants to go to school in Springfield when we have these 2 elementary schools in Fairfax Station IN our neighborhood.
The porblem that to relieve the pressure off SCSS is that a major change has to be done.
7:33am,
I agree, but I think that would be ok for now. We need to see what happens to LB next year when the renovations are complete before we send more students. We have learned that the predicted amounts are not accurate and usually on the low side. There are just too many unknowns. My friends are waiting to see the results of this study before deciding on keeping their kids in private school or sending them to HF next year. I am sure that there are many in that circumstance at LB also.
I think that if the SB agrees to hold on the "northern SC" boundary move with a caveat that says they will readdress next year I will be content.
I also agree that the MN area is a small # of HS kids and they should be allowed to stay at SCSS and have minimal impact.
More and more it seems that we should be looking at the elementary school boundaries more.
I read on the Barrington community website that for what ever reason, easing overcrowding at Silverbrook Elementary by sending some to Halley was "politically" not possible. I wonder if that has something to do with the demographics of Halley?
Why does the Halley boundary include some island communities inside of the Lorton Station boundary?
8:36
Parts of "Fairfax Station" goes to Sangster and to LBSS for that matter. Do those folks have a problem with Lee Chapel? The more I hear about the danger of Lee Chapel Rd. the more I think it is just a red herring to throw on top the pile issues to convince the SB to leave Silverbrook alone. If this road is a problem the police could crack down on the drivers of this road for a few months to make it safer.
You can't have the caveat as 8:47 mentions because you can't have a boundary study within 3 years. There is no way that the SC area especially the political heavyweights in Silverbrook area would "allow" an SCSS study in 2004/5, the one now in 06/07 AND a followup one in 07/08. Whatever is done this year has to be drastic enough to redistrict the student populations at H, LB, and SC (enough so that ALL schools are UC)and then let everyone alone for at least a 3 year period.
Delaying the northern SC part of the study would be continuation of a boundary study not a new one. Rules are made to be broken anyhow. The boundary study we are doing now is inside the 3-year window. I agree it is not the best way to do business, but we really will not know the student population at LB until next October.
I don't understand, why will we not know the student population until next October? Do the projections not take in account pupil placements and other factors?
We know the 6th grade population of the schools that feed into LBSS. We also have past histories of prior 6th grade populations as compared to who enrolled in 7th grade at LB both prior to the renovation and during the renovation. You can also compare the 6th grade populations of Hayfield feeders compared to the corresponding Hayfield 7th grade classes prior to, during, and after THEIR renovation.
The fact that the School Board had to revisit the SC issue so quickly is that too many neighborhoods were redistricted into SC. They cannot put a band-aid on this problem when there is major surgery required. It would be irresponsible for them to not use the empty seats at both LB and Hayfield. If they don't use both schools' seats, it will show them to be political lackeys, available to be bought off by wealthy neighborhoods.
Sending all of Lorton Station and all of Mason Neck to Hayfield is an option, the school is pretty close to each of these ES. In fact, all the school if FX county are close to each other.
The "bump" into the Sanster boundary going to Silverbrook west to east and N of SB rd is 2 large developments with HOA's. Going west to east you have South Oaks Run (301 homes), Barrington (476 "executive style" homes). The public deserves to know the exact numbers at all grade levels coming from these 2 developments as well as the status of all residences (pre-K, empty nest, etc). These 2 could be permanently moved to Lake Braddock leaving Silverbrook as a split feeder if numbers show zero trailers needed at LB as well as a comfortable cushion.
Heading east you have areas with legal decriptions as per FX county like Silverbrook (inc Silverline Dr), Triple Ridge and then Timber Ridge. Oddly enough Chevalier didn't state all affected legal description areas on his presentation and skipped over Silverbrook and Triple Ridge to state Timber Ridge. Yet he colored all these communities on the map.
Here's a link to an article by a writer from the Washington Post on the Hagel Circle Island:
http://www.desiwriter.com/clip_lorton.html
It's sixties style bussing with a real twist in FCPS. Halley was one of the schools that got extra funding from FCPS under Dr Domenech's Project Excell program:
http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/printarticle.asp?article=16463&archive=true
Read the school board meeting minutes:
http://www.fcps.k12.va.us/schlbd/minutes/20030303R.pdf
Prior to opening Lorton Station Halley was getting $500,000 extra from FCPS due to % of ESOL and FRPM. That Project Excell Program was entrenched at Halley and the SB didn't take appropriate timely action to ensure resources would have moved to Lorton Station.
10/30/2006 10:25 AM, http://www.desiwriter.com/clip_lorton.html
Wow, thanks for the link to this article. The good news is they will be able to stay at South County because they have Halley for the ES. I hope!
SC is overcrowded because too many neighborhoods were put the boundaries AND the estimates were too low. McKibbon pointed out the fact that the numbers estimated for LB and HF when SC was opening were also too low.
There is enough information to make a good estimate at LB, but the margin of error will be high and the FP has a history of being wildly off the mark. I have trouble trusting the estimates now (and the capacity numbers need review).
Wait! I found the solution to the undercapacity problems at LB and HF. Let's lower the capacity!
10:43
That is what the Silverbrook community did! Now LBSS does not have room for the Silverbrook kids. To bad Tistadt does not agree with their numbers.
10:25
Two years ago during the first boundary discussion, I tried to find out those numbers and actually forwarded a lengthy letter to Facilities and Brad Center about peeling off those neighborhoods to LBSS. However I did not know if the numbers would be enough to make a differences. A planner in Facilities office did get back to me saying that they may be an option using the Lake Mercer Parkland and Silverbrook Rd. as a boundary line. Never did get a response as to how many kids that would have moved. I wonder if it is a secret only to be known by facilities and whoever they decide to disclose this data too.
I've seen FCPS raise and lower capacity depending on the desired outcome.
to: 10/30/2006 10:34 AM
from: 10/30/2006 10:25 AM
There are lots of small dense for Fairfax areas that benefit from a community school especially where specific families have students that are walkers. The school can be a resource for these families and become a hub for the community. I saw this happen at a school where they even moved the library during renovation so common area resources could be used by the neighboring communities many of which had ESOL and FRPM students.
FCPS is proposing a Community School concept for Graham Rd and it can be read on boarddocs under news then reports:
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/Public?OpenFrameSet
This report also states the Project Excell class size ratio as 17:1 which I guess meant people from Fairfax Station also got that for their kids at Halley along with full-day kindergarten.
You can find out numbers from places like Barrington and South Oaks Run from Bus routes. That's where Chevalier got numbers from prior boundary processes. The year they opened several elementary schools and new GT centers there were a lot more numbers. They also had contiguous boundaries on the CIP.
Doing a spreadsheet from the student directories would give good info.
I just think it comical that when the WSHS/LEE/LBSS study was going on, SCSS families HELPED those split-feeder Hunt Valley kids get into WSHS..an O/C school. THEN had the audacity to advocate for Daventry to get in too! Not too mention moving Sangster to LBSS to fill the very seats they hoped to avoid in this study.
What comes around, goes around. I suggest the schoolboard look at those emails and see the two faces.
I think the countywide study is a red herring. Give it up please.
Not less than a year ago, the schoolboard said NO.
The only reason they'd do it now is for the pure benefit of the "founding families" at SCSS. These schoolboard members are so weak, this is their feeble attempt to rectify their massive mistake/ and get off the focus of overcrowding at one school.
Pretty obvious to the rest of the County- not fooling anyone.
The rest of FCPS needs to be made aware of the scheming of the Silverbrook crowd. The PTSAs of all FCPS schools, most especially those who are on the CIP list, need to know that if a MS is authorized for SC, this will put their own school's renovations on the back burner for years.
This is a criminal waste of taxpayers' funds to NOT use the excess capacity at Hayfield and Lake Braddock.
It would not surprise me if the the Hagel circle islands get moved out of SC in the middle of the night.
1:27 Where are you from? Who do you represent?
BEFORE the $56 million renovation of LBSS, the school has successfully educated 4500 students.
Pardon me- I mean to say, the total per year has reached 4500.
South County needs Silverbrook and Mason Neck to remain a successful school. Modify option 2a and send Newington Forest to LB, send all of Lorton Station to Hayfield. Everybody else stays at SC.
3:12
So South County cannot be successful with Newington Forest but it can with Silverbrook? Why? And why send all of Lorton Station to Hayfield? Is there something in the portion of Lorton Station in option 2a that will make SC unsuccessful?
There's an article in this past week's Laurel Hill Connection regarding this issue. I'm glad to see the F&P wanting to delay the ms construction until excess capacity is used at LB&H. Hopefully the elected SB will be hearing from their constituents across the county regarding this matter.
http://connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=72829&paper=80&cat=104
I am not in SC and I will contact my SB members and tell them to build the MS! Push other stuff back as it is less important.
^^^I don't know about that. Falling ceiling tiles in schools is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
The MS is not necessary at this time since there are surplus seats at Lake Braddock and Hayfield. The question of course will be which neighborhood is assigned to which school?
Couldn't they turn some of those old prison buildings into temporary classrooms until the middle school is built?
How about if they close Bryant and build a new "Alternative High School" on the land near SCSS?
I truly believe if Silverbrook leaves, SCSS will become a mediocre school. We are the ones who fought for the school, came up with the public-private partnership, and currently are in student and parental leadership positions.
Why aren't you at the Football game?
Oh I didn't know you created a private school, forgive me, lead on. I will stay over here at my mediocre school and muddle along without you.
You know 7:17 now I hope they keep Silverbrook in SCSS, with an attitude like yours LBSS would be better off without you. If you think money and influence makes you entitled at the expense to others who are not as fortunate then life would be alot easier on the rest of us if you were not around.
YEven though the options are being weighed, we all know full well that Silverbrook is not going to Lake Braddock. Why would we want that school? It's full of gang activity and it's too far for us to travel.
Hayfield seems to be doing just fine without Silverbrook. It does need more students to offer classes and for sports. How much money is it costing to not make boundary changes?
Don't pat yourselves too hard on the back. The county looks at the whole Lorton/Laurel Hill as a phoenix arising from the ashes. Never forget that the goal of getting rid of the prison and improving this section of the county predates any endeavors on the part of Fairfax Station Silverbrook negotiators. Federal, State, and County elected officials were quite pleased to promote/endorse this public-private partnership as part of the transformation of this section of Fairfax County.
Such partnerships are good bragging rights and publicity for their business acumen. Brady (ex-FCPS Supt) was part of the Hayfield Pyramid Solutions and jumped ship to DC just before the boundary change process. This county is pumping a lot of money into the area besides schools.
They do deserve a big kudos for changing the laws (Albo), signing the federal land over at the eleventh hour attached to a bill NOBODY would read to the end anyway(Davis) and bringing in the developers (Hyland) while swapping the land for a burro farm all to be turned into a mega school with added seats during construction to accomodate political lines(Storck et al) JUST TO END UP OVERCROWDED AND IN THIS MESS!!! KUDOS BOYS!
Oh yeah, and one Lady who saw it all through, and will now take the seat in the back of the classroom... in a whole different pyramid.
Ahh, politics.
I blame Bradsher.
It they have a 3d (or 4th) meeting lets try and do them at Hayfield or Lake Braddock. This boundary study is about all three attendence areas and all three should have a meeting in their school. Besides, the SC auditorium is too small.
Can the SC community agree to the next meeting at HF or LB?
SC is centrally located. The whole issue with H and LB is that they are too far away for the SC kids to attend school. It's even farther for H area residents to get to LB or vice versa.
I am from HF and I would be happy to drive to LB for the next meeting. I have no doubt the SB community will show -- they would drive anywhere for this meeting.
I would prefer it be at HF, but it is important to include all of the communities (at least have them feel included). This will be the 3d meeting in SC. Enough already.
I agree that the SCSS auditorium is way too small for the crowd that will come to the next meeting. It would not surprise me if the Fire Department showed up.
If the weather is nice I guess we could go out to the FB stadium though.
Students are bussed long distances for many sending areas like Langley, Robinson, Madison, Mclean, Lake Braddock areas so get over it. South County Secondary School is not going to be George Mason in Falls Church which is a separate municipality. Fairfax Station is not the City of Fairfax. Yes there might be back-room tradeoffs like Jay Matthews wrote about in Supertest but un less there is a donation of a middle school a new building is unnacceptable. A donation is not the same thing as a public private partnership .
To those people suggesting Saratoga go to Hayfield, think again. Saratoga is a Lee community, and we will not allow you to use us to solve your problems. If you get us involved in your mess, be prepared for a fight. Nothing wrong with Hayfield, but we are Lancers, have been through two boundary studies, and we are done. With so many empty seats at H, MV and LB, there is no need to involve Lee HS or Saratoga.
Saratoga- Please write the schoolboard and keep them on focus. It isnt about dragging everyone else into this to solve their dilema- "one school is overcrowded and the 2 next door have room."
-WSHS family
WSHS family, thank-you for your support. I will write the schoolboard. They dragged WSHS into the first boundary study at the 11th hour, let's make sure this does not happen again.
8:44-
Can you tell me why we aren't using the Mount vernon seats? last time I checked there were over 700 and their middle school had over 100.
Messing with the Edison, Lee, Robinson, West Potomac, and West Sprinfield borders doesn't solve the issue that SCSS is vastly overcrowded and Hayfield & Lake Braddock have seats to accomodate redistricted SCSS kids.
Hear, Hear to you at Lee, Obviously your happy at Lee and you should stay at Lee. But you bring up Mount Vernon, shame on you that school is sacred ground not to be spoiled with talk of any changes to the most under utilized renovated school in the county.
Right you are- Robinson is also on that list.
At the Silverbrook-only meeting, the powers that be actually passed out a list of all the schools that share LBSS boundaries and claimed that LB seats need to be saved for these schools.
Th issue at hand is SCSS overcrowding. Moving Robinson, Woodson or any non SCSS kids into LB DOES NOT solve the SCSS overcrowding. Clearly Silverbrook is trying to divert attention.
Hey, why is Mount Vernon not being looked at? It has many seats available and it could help the OC at South County.
Silverbrook may be trying to divert attention and those schools next to LBSS may be close to capacity now, but I wonder what the projections are for those schools. I thought the overall school age population is dropping(except in HSS and SCSS areas)for the entire county and I would assume that includes Robinson and other schools that borders LBSS. If that is so, then there is no need to "save" those seats at LBSS and it would be logical to fill them with students now from the overcrowded SCSS.
9:57, my point exactly! SCSS is doing anything they can to not attend LB.
From 9:49 :)
I was at that meeting and the person didn't say the seats at LB were there for other schools. He said they were all full including LB, that the school board under projected the enrollments for these schools west of 95 and said leave them all alone
From the Silverbrook Meeting handout
"REPEAT THE MANTRA:
a. Silverbrook MUST together within the SCSS boundary
b. Lake Braddock does not have the core capacity to handle our students."
Too bad not everyone agrees with the Silverbrook Mantra, even within Silverbrook.
I agree that we should not bring other areas into the study in the 11th hour. That would not be fair andinclude their opinions. Let's delay the study another year (or two) and bring others (Lee, Mt. Vernon, WSHA et al) on board from the beginning.
There are better solutions for all if we do not limit the region under consideration. The boundary with SCSS and MV is large while the boundary with HF is small.
While we are at it let's take a look at the elementary school boundaries as well.
Sending a Elementary school like Saratoga from Lee to HF and then sending Newington Forest to Lee looks good on a map and the numbers look good. What would be wrong with that? It certainly looks like a better option than the ones presetned.
Newington Forest would be an island to Lee if Saratoga was sent to Hayfield. Saratoga has been part Lee HS for many years and is an important community for that school. Sounds like you are a Lorton Station/Mason Neck resident ready to push someone else out of their school district, just so you can stay at SCSS instead of going to Hayfield. You are trying very hard to put another community like Saratoga at Hayfield so you don't have to go. Nice try, won't work.
If you want real numbers on feeder schools they can be found on the reports to the state under statistics on the FCPS homepage. It shows years back and Sept 2006. As for elementary boundaries, it is obvious that portions of Newington Forest, Lorton Station, Silverbrook, and Halley will attend the needed Laurel Hill. Communities that should be moved to Hayfield or LB should be those which would not be logical for Laurel Hill. What I would be curious to see is numbers isolated for South Oaks Run and Barrington as well as the Halley bump in the LB attendance area. As for Mason Neck, which refused Mount Vernon and the spineless past and present school board members, they can go wherever the bus takes them. The IB program didn't draw them in so call it a TJ satellite - then they might get on the bus.
9:16,
Gary S said that we were not using MV in this study because their Middle School feeders are full and the Mason Neck/Gunston made a sucessful appeal to the SB not to include MV in the study due to the long drive on Rt 1.
Not including more of the SCSS boundary schools really limited the fp. As a result they came up with 3 bad options. Sending them back to the drawing board with the authority to include more pyramids could provide some acceptable options.
Do you think that when the Laurel Hill school is done there will be another fight over Hagel circle(s) like there was when LS opened?
How does including more pyramids provide acceptable options? Silverbrook/Barrington and Newington Forest refuse to go to Lake Braddock. Lorton Station and Mason Neck refuse to go to Hayfield. How does adding more schools solve that problem?
11:39,
You are probably right that those communities will not accept HF or LB under any circumstances. But, the options (especially #1) presented so far are not acceptable to HF or LB either. Including Lee, MV, WSHS, and others would give the FP the ability to make options that make sense to the rest of county.
Still, you haven't answered the question. I agree, option 1 is not an option at all. So how would you solve overcrowding at SCSS? Where would you send Lorton Station, Mason Neck, Crosspoint/Barrington, Newington Forest? I think options 2A and 2B are about as good as you are going to get. I think both options are acceptable to the rest of the county. Only those who will be moved out of SCSS seem to have a problem with these two options.
We have an instigator in our prescence. No other schools will be considered in this boundary study. No matter how hard you try to give someone else your problem.
Call the SB. Stay on task.
The issues are clearly written and the objectives are clearly stated. Adding more schools is NOT an available option, nor are they even considering it.
I live in Fairfax Station within the LB boundaries. I am not in favor of Option 1 but I do think 2B is workable. I don't see where Silverbrook residents get off saying that the commute from their subdivisions to Lake Braddock is too far and too dangerous but it's good enough for all of us who live even further from Lake Braddock.
I don't think that the Silverbrook residents think that the drive to LB is ok for anyone in Fairfax Station. They are pushing for a MS so that everyone in the community can avoid the drive and overcrowding at LB.
So Silverbrook is advocating for current LB students who live in Fairfax Station to go to SC?
Enough whining about the drive from Crosspointe and Barrington to LB. Robinson and Langley commutes are much longer than all of the current FFXSTA-LB commutes which again are longer than anything SIlverbrook would have to "endure".
It is fiscally irresponsible to build an ms that isn't necessary as long as there are empty seats at LB and Hayfield.
and Mount Vernon
Has anyone heard or from folks in the Newington Forest Community. If I am them I would think Silverbrook is looking at it as its "us or them" thats got to go.
But Mt Vernon isn't in the study. The SB needs to focus on the three schools actually in the study.
The SB could take no action based on this study and order a new study for next year that includes more attendence areas.
And SCSS parents need to focus on the three schools actually in the study, and stop suggesting other schools and neighborhoods be included.
Liz B for School Board!
I don't think its ALL SCSS parents, just the ones north-of-Silverbrook, west-of-Hooes ie the Option 2B candidates.
To be a successful SB member, you must look past what your immediate HOA wants and be prepared to vote against them if that's what is best for the school system overall.
Bradsher hasn't exhibited that ability.
Not much more to say until we here from fp on 1 Nov.
Remember tomorrow is All Saint's Day. Everyone be good.
Time to TREAT Barrington and Crosspointe nicely on this blog or we will definitely TRICK you into agreement.
I am new to this blog but wanted to add a thought about Hayfield and the boundary study. Being a SCSS parent I have to say that Hayfield is a wonderful school with great families and great teachers. It is newly renovated and looks fantastic. We at SCSS all envy your huge and spacious building. Our kids had a great experience at Hayfield and they miss their friends there. I hope this boundary adjustment gives back to Hayfield just enough students so as not to crowd but to help the school be able to offer all the great FCPS courses and programs that it deserves and helps to bring it to where it should be in terms of academics, sports etc. Hayfield got a raw deal in this first boundary study and it deserves better.
We are happy at SCSS because, among other reasons, it is so close to home after commuting so far to Hayfield for so many years. Like those of you closer to Hayfield, we now have a community school and can leave the house at 7:00 instead of 6:20 to get our kids to school. It saddens me, however, to see so much bitterness between these communities and I think these blogs don't help.
I think this blog helps taxpayers and provides insight unfortunately not given from the media. If you do not like the opportunity for public comment and discourse refrain from reading. It is ludicrous that Barrington and west consider Lake Braddock too far. Stating that Hayfield is too far for SC current attendees from certain geographic areas is also ridiculous. Chevalier didn't prsent an option with Gunston to LB and Barrington to Hayfield.
Both 2A and 2B work fine, and I have not seen anything better suggested by anyone. Adding more schools into this boundary study will not change the fact that SCSS is overcrowded and students need to be moved to other schools. The SB needs to get tough and make the right decisions. People will come up with all kinds of excuses and arguments to keep their community at SCSS, including travel time.
8:02
I think if you asked most parents and students for that matter here at Hayfield, that they would not mind having some kids come back, but they would want, just as you state, not to many back putting Hayfield back to an overcrowded school which it had suffered for years. Option 1 however is just bad for the students. I ping pongs the kids from Hayfield back to SCSS and creates a middle school at Hayfield equal to the size of the High School. As you know HSS has a distinct separation between the two schools within the same walls, option 1, would have to mingle the kids together and create scheduling nightmares for the cafeteria, and gyms common to both schools. Of you folks at SCSS know all about that.
As far as this Blog, I see nothing wrong with it. Communities in the SCSS are very vocal and rightly so considering what is at stake, but your collective voices seems to drown out those of us in the other communities that also have something at stake here. Good for you, I admire the organization that your communities have been able to put forth, but this little blog allows for a different point of view, a view that may be lost or overlooked within the lock step drum beat coming from the Silverbrook community. Even Facilities and Planning titles meetings as "South County Boundry", when in fact the boundary the could be changed is shared by Hayfield and Lake Braddock. This is not just a South County issue!
Rant over.
The eastern edges of the current SC boundaries need to be redistricted to Hayfield, the western portion to Lake Braddock. It would be ridiculous for the Silverbrook area (on the west side)to be redistricted to Hayfield. However, it is logical for Silverbrook to be reassigned to Lake Braddock.
Your school is your community school no matter what the distance. Students and parents have to get involved to make it their community. There are many neighborhoods in Fairfax Station who are further away from Lake Braddock than the 2B Option Candidates. They are part of the Lake Braddock community. The same can be said for Clifton families at Robinson or Herndon families at Langley.
Blogs are a public forum and I think they are immensely helpful. Of course, a blog is not the only way to get the message across, but is one method. I don't know about others but in addition to blog forums, I have been contacting the usual suspects at FCPS and the Board of Supervisors.
Post a Comment