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:
«Oldest ‹Older 2601 – 2729 of 2729Let's complain whether or not the school board can change the weather. should we start a new blog?
139,
LBSS is expected to have over 300 empty spaces next year. They can certainly take 50-75 more rising 7th graders from Silverbrook.
Let's not send them to SCSS for a couple of years and then jerk them out and make them Bruins in 09 or 10. That is just mean and unecessary.
Speaker Pelosi just convened a panel to figure out how to deal with the weather. Maybe our board could work with that group.
Finally we are starting to make progress!
Whether the weather is good or bad SCSS will remain overcrowded unless LBSS is utilized. How do you like that forecast.
Hayfield has over 900 empty seats and Mt. Vernon has many as well. Why must we insist on using LBSS?
Just kidding.
Move the GTC to Laurel Hills and then send all of LS and Gunston ES to HF. Will that put SCSS undercapacity or at least close enough not to matter?
Remember this is a Hayfield blog and as such be sure to write in each posting how SB or NF must go to LBSS. Don't forget to use the words "elite, entitlememt, diversity" etc.
At least folks at Hayfield are the only ones advocating a solution. All we hear from Lake Braddock is they will never have room for anyone despite the facts, and from the South County so called community, don't send us to that ikky school in Alexandria or Burke. Frankly I wish you could stay were you are and leave us alone. Hayfield is a nice little school as it is but we realize that won't happen and hope to keep too many from returning. When kids come back I think you will see they will be happy to leave the South County school community. All I can say is I hope that this is over for Hayfield on 2/22 and we never have to hear the phrase South County Boundary study with Hayfield involved again.
HF should not be involved in the next study. We can move more to HF with an admin move when LHES boundaries are set.
4:52, you forgot "nouveau riche." More importantly, please don't forget to post as "Anonymous." That makes it SO much easier to post potshots as well as unfair and ludicrous boundary proposals.
I think everyone hopes the same 5:27.
The folks at Hayfield certainly have a legit concern about overcrowding however I see or read little evidence that such folks have come up with any solution, other than of course accusing certain communities of certain things.
It would be interesting to see how Hayfield residents would react if they were in the same position as SB or NF. If memorty serves us all correctly as far back as 1998 they were considering building a MS on a site once called the Pohick site. There was a possibility that Hayfield would become a HS for a brief second. The MS issue was dead in the water because those from Hayfield didn't want to travel that far for a MS. Funny though, it was OK for SB,NF and others to travel that far to Hayfield all those years.
You see all SB and NF wanted was a school closer to their homes. It was not about Hayfield per say. It was a matter of distance, fairness and a quality of life. You can spin it anyway you want VA State of Mind or whoever you are. But for those of you with the ability to reason, that is what it is all about. (BY the way it is great the area had grown so much, change is good. With growth comes infrastructure needs, transportation and schools are the top priorities.)
Bring back Nancy Pelosi on the blog it made more sense than most of these statements.
5:32
We know, we know, you will do all you can to kick out those you think are not worthy to breath the same school air as your kids. If that means slipping a few bucks to Dale in order to avoid open debate why not. What are you trying to hide?
What is this??? Some sort of sad comedic blog?
5:46
I agree with what you say but you only look at it as an issue for only NF and SB. There are other communities involved in this issue and from my point of view from Hayfield yours is one particular community that comes with the weight and organization of a 500lb gorilla. Throughout the first study two years ago and most of this study communities that were severly impacted were not getting their concerns heard. Now the gorilla is whinning and crying because it not all about them. How would you feel if you sat over here and heard some of the comments we heard sitting in breakout rooms twice now. I can tell you it was ugly and many of us came out feeling degraded by many of those leaving two years ago or advocating to stay at SCSS this past fall. Hayfield will get kids back and welcomes whoever that comes, all we are advocating is that they do not bring too many back. If we were not involved you would probably get your way and send all of East of 95 back to Hayfield moving the crowded situation back from SCSS. We do not want to see that happen and I know most in your community would not want that for you former school, but there are many that would love to see us get dumped on and become a crowded school. The temptation is there and the only thing to counter that is the use of LBSS. It is not an ideal situation but at least it is still closer to Silverbrook and Newington forest then is Hayfield.
546
Part of Lorton Station, part of Halley, and the Mason Neck portion of Gunston ES want the same thing, but SCSS is not big enough for all of you. Some of those schools are and/or will come to Hayfield as will the future LHES. SCSS will still be overcrowded if NF or SB doesn't go to LBSS. Where do the other 500 go? The solution is LBSS - they will have the room when the kids get there (and then some). How can you say there is not solution offered?
Here are a few that I have read:
1. Send all of NF (aka 2A)
2. Send a portion of northern Silverbrook (aka 2B)
3. Send all of Silverbrook for 7-8 grade. (a hybrid of option #1)
4. Send a portion of Halley and Silverbrook.
5. Send a portion of Halley or SB to Sangster and then LBSS.
You can draw out any portion from the area you want. The area that has to (or gets to) go will not like it. Who do you think should use the space at LBSS? Anyone you send to LB will have a longer drive then they will to SCSS. There is no good solution in the short term.
I say make SC a middle school only, make Hayfield a hs only. Combine the 2 pyramids.
6:11
Fair commentary. Sorry for the nasty comments at the break-out sessions. Some people don't quite get it. This blog has caused tremendous community harm, more so than the break-out sessions.
Hayfield and Lake Braddock are great schools too bad some don't feel that way.
657
I think you give the blog too much credit. I doubt that many people really read it let alone put much value to it.
It is all anonymous (except VASM) so you should read the comments like you read the comics.
I read the comics in my underware.
What the blog has done is created a public forum. The SB members do read it and do listen. Two years ago, there was no blog and "dissenters" from the Silverbrook mantra were claimed to be non-existent. If nothing else, this message board has proved that there are a variety of opinions from all over the SC/LB/H areas.
Nice crap for them to read. Glad they use their precious time on such nonsubstantial, misinformed matter.
Can someone list all of the bad information and all of the good information that this blog has shown?
7:53 -- a great question. Here's an offer I want to make to anyone reading here: I would like to place a new post on the front page of the blog that lists all options currently on the table before the school board, with PROS and CONS of each option FOR EACH general neighborhood/residential area affected by this latest study. Not just the Hayfield perspective on each option, but advantages and disadvantages for EVERYONE affected. No BS, no spin, no more names, no more judgments, just the facts. I know the basics on the Hayfield side and can tap people here if I need to fill in the blanks, but I need help from NF, Silverbrook, Crosspointe, Mason Neck and other SC folks to get and understand all of the pros/cons from your side. You can contact me via email through my Blogger profile. Everyone's accusing this blog of driving a wedge between the communities -- I'm willing to do my part to turn the ship around. Who else is willing to step up to the plate to help me?
If you go to the FCPS website, you can see the pro/cons for each option in the Town Hall notes. They aren't officiallycategorized by neighborhoods but you can soewhat guess who said what.
I honestly don't see an issue with your blog. In fact, I think it is wonderful. My SIL and brother live in the WSHS pyramid and credit the public blogs that were online for keeping WSHS as is.
I agree with 9:19. I hope the SB are reading this blog, because I think people really say what they think here. Some neighborhoods are not as organized as others, but the people from those neighborhoods have valid points which need to be heard.
Why do Hayfield people believe BRAC will affect their school more than any of the other schools such as Lake Braddock, West Springfield, Lee, and Edison?
The majority of workers will be moved to the Engineering Proving Ground (EPG) which is on the west side of I 95. I think a rational homebuyer with a family moving into the area due to BRAC would choose a neighborhood that goes to West Springfield or Lake Braddock. In those areas you have reasonable home prices, good schools, and a fairly short commute. Saying you need to keep a buffer at Hayfield because of BRAC can be said for all the schools in the area including Lake Braddock which is facing more uncertainy because the remodelling isn't complete yet.
Hayfield does not think that we will affected more than the schools listed. We know that we will be affected because there is construction going on now and many areas are zoned for construction. BRAC will put more pressure on those areas to build more houses on those lots. The board saw this and directed F&P to establish a buffer, not Hayfield. It does not mean there will be empty spaces. It means those spaces will be filled by incoming families that are currently not in the pipline of feeder schools.
F&P left a "buffer" of @ 200-250 at Hayfield to be filled by those incoming families. They can and should do the same at LBSS by only sending 450-500 students from NF or SB.
The EPG will take 18,000 new jobs and Ft. Belvoir 5,000, according to the information sent out by Tom Davis. The EPG is in the Lee school district, but West Springfield is the closest school. Both Lee and West Springfield were left over capacity and have no buffer for BRAC. Hayfield parents are smart to protect their school so they will not end up in the same situation. There is a lot going on in the area and it seems that Lake Braddock is unwilling to be part of the solution. Lee high school was renovated when it was 300 kids over capacity and Hayfield was renovated when it was 600 kids over capacity, and your remodeling will be finished before any changes go into effect, so stop your whining. By the way, many people who work at Ft. Belvoir live in the Hayfield and Lee school districts and send their children to those fine schools. Your comment that rational homebuyers would buy in the Lake Braddock and West Springfield school district is an insult to those of us who send our children to schools east of I95.
You guys in the east need to get a thicker skin. You live where you live, enjoy it. Don't take everything so seriously and be glad you have schools that are for the most part renovated and a Supervisor that works for his constituents.
But come on 925 empty seat at Hayfield 800+ at Mt. Vernon, that is enough empty seats to symbolize a school in itself. COME ON!
It would be interesting to know how many discrete bloggers there have been on this thread, as well as which ES they 'belong' to. The downside of being anonymous is that there is no way for VASM to aggregate how many different people have posted, let alone what part of the County they are from!
What does Mount Vernon have anything to do with the space at Hayfield. That school is further from Hayfield than is South County and shares nothing with us as a community. Stop harping on Mt. Vernon, it is not in this study for a reason, because it is not anywhere close to reasonbly send anyone from Hayfield or South County. As far as 925 empty seats at Hayfield, that statement is designed to blow smoke and you know it. That many seats will be declining next year and more are coming we know that. I know you want Hayfield to be packed to the brim but fortunately others with more sense and good planning are fighting against throwing the numbers at Hayfield out of wack. The days of pushing Hayfield around are over.
and there will be over 750 empty spaces in LBSS in 2011 (over 300 now).
and stop with the "925 at Hayfield" nonsense. We all know that is today's number not what is available to inbound students.
458 ... or what part of the Country they are from
Is MN in our county?
Will anyone be moving FROM West Springfield HS because of this study? I want to make sure my child's enrollment in an immersion program is not adversely impacted. Gunga galunga.
This study is not about Mount Vernon, West Potomac, Edison, Lee, West Springfield, or Robinson. Have I forgotten anyone?
It is about South County, Lake Braddock and Hayfield only.
Apparently this study is not about Lake Braddock anymore.
Then why fcps call it the "South County Boundary Study"? You mean there are other schools in the study? I thought this was just about getting some kids out of South County.
The School Board is well-known for ignoring/modifying the F&P recommendation. Remember they want to be re-elected. If they actually desire votes, they will know that the fiscally and morally responsible decision is to use both Lake Braddock and Hayfield to solve the SC crisis.
Actually F&P have already come up with two good options 2A and 2B. Both left Hayfield and Lake Braddock at 90% capacity and SCSS at 100% capacity. If the school board voted for 2A or 2B, I think they would have a good chance of being re-elected.
8:47 Good point! And from what was said at the Town Hall Meetings, the SB has the right to vote no on the F&P rec and vote yes on any and all options (including any that they design on their own.
8:47 Good point! And from what was said at the Town Hall Meetings, the SB has the right to vote no on the F&P rec and vote yes on any and all options (including any that they design on their own.
The school board could use 2a or 2b w/ a mod, keep mason neck & lorton valley at sc
Let us ensure that they do not revive Option #1. That was awful all the way around.
934,
another good mod to 2ab is to send 7-8-9 to Hayfield and only rising 7 to LBSS. HF can take more next year -- LB needs to have the students come slower.
Actually, I think 2A and 2B both left Lorton Valley at South County, which is where is should be. Sending 7th graders only to Lake Braddock is also a good idea and only a slight modification to both 2A and 2B.
Actually we would like to keep our 7th graders at SCSS and we agree there should be no movement of LV out of SCSS. LBSS should not be opened at this time based upon data, consultant information and Boundary Stated Criteria.
We are well aware there remains a problem with this boundary. A modification may still need to take place if 150 come back into the boundary instead of being sent back to Hayfield.
The data and the consultant information show over 300 empty seats at LBSS growing to over 750 by 2011. Why should we not start sending 50-75 rising 7th graders/year now? Why wait? We have to use predictions for all three schools to make these decisions. If we wait two years we will have to use predictions again. This could go on and on forever. At some point we have to make a decsion -- leave room for error -- but make a decision. Sending rising 7 is pretty low risk, but high payoff in the future.
1038,
Which of the "boundary stated criteria" require LBSS not to be opened?
If Lake Braddock is not used now, Lorton Valley will have to go to Hayfield. That is why they are being sent to Hayfield in this lastest study, because they can keep SCSS at 117% with Lorton Valley gone. This is a terrible alternative. Lorton Valley is walking distance to SCSS, and they should go to that school. Hayfield numbers also go up with Lorton Valley going there. Hayfield should be kept at 90% capacity. Use Lake Braddock now, it is the only way to keep Lorton Valley at SCSS, and keep Hayfield at 90%.
So is the recommendation going to keep Lorton Valley & Mason Neck at SCSS and wait on Lake Braddock until capacity numbers are low at that school? If that happens, SCSS will still be way OC and there may be a chance Lake Braddock will have to take about 200 – 300 more students, because LV & MN stay as SCSS. That will put Lake Braddock over capacity and keep SCSS at capacity or over. Hayfield will still be under capacity, and should not go through another boundary study. Is this good for all 3 schools? I don’t think so, what do other blogger think? Could we see SCSS Boundary Study 4 or 5 because of this, oh boy.
I agree with 12:05, give Hayfield about 500 students now and be done with Hayfield. If they wait on Lake Braddock it only makes it harder on those that eventually leave to LBSS because those students would have already started at SCSS. 12:03 is correct. Lorton Valley is being thrown back to Hayfield because the numbers would be too high at SCSS and only because Lake Braddock is not being used. I agree Lorton Valley should go to SCSS although this area really is not in a safe walking distance to SCSS. It is close. Sending the rising 7th graders only to LBSS from the Silverbrook split or the Newington Forest area makes sense and is not going to be the end of the world for those kids. I plan on sending an email to the school board with this idea.
12:58 – I think that is option 2a or 2b, with not amendments. I know it put Mason Neck at Hayfield, but they will adjust, Hayfield is a great school. It will also split Silverbrook or put Newington Forest at Lake Braddock, but that is a great school and they will adjust too. Starting with 7th grade is a good idea, I know Lake Braddock will be at capacity or a little over for a while, but if the school board sends over students slowing it should help. This has got to end, and keep SCSS at a good capacity.
Sending only rising 7th (@50-75/year) to LBSS will not make them at or near capacity at any time - now or the future. They have over 300 empty spaces now.
The rub for them is the "Middle School" space. Their excess space is on the "High School" side. The GT Center takes up space on the "Middle School" portion and many of those kids go somewhere other than LB to High School (TJ or base school) so the High School side will be perpetually empty unless they reconfigure and redesginate what is "HS" what is "MS" and what is GT. Don't be fooled by those that spin and say "the LB MS only has 30 spaces". This sound bite distorts the true picture.
Good post 1:31. It would be easy for Lake Braddock to reconfigure space for the GT kids. Taxpayers pay enough as it is for GT centers. We don't want to pay for all those empty HS seats at Lake Braddock, just because of a GT center in the middle school, which can be easily fixed.
Let’s hope the SB sends 500 to HF and 500 to LB. That is the only sensible thing to do. Lorton Valley or Mason Neck to Hayfield.
ok, but how about 400 each ... :)
I think 1:31 has a sensible plan. No one plan can make all happy but what 1:31 proposes makes the most sense of any I have heard. I will contact the school board about this idea.
To whom does it make the most sense to? Just the 3 bloggers from Hayfield, and the 2 from LS, and the 2 from MN? Kind of appears like a little special interest group to me having a party among themselves.
Whatever.
And you have a better plan?
I know I will contact the school board about using the space at Hayfield. Keeping Lorton Valley & Mason Neck at SCSS is a terrible plan. It will keep Hayfield in the 80% capacity range, overcrowd South County and possibly send more students to Lake Braddock, forcing them to be over capacity. Lorton Valley or Mason Neck need to go to Hayfield, don’t care which one, one has to go.
28 more days
6:04
I don't think both Mason Neck and Lorton Valley will stay at SCSS.
No, but hopefully at least one of them will get to stay.
I think the idea of using LBSS makes sense to more than the couple of three bloggers though.
It makes sense to me and my younger kids go to one of the schools that may be split. I don't want to see South County remain overcapacity. I do want to see all available seats used before contemplating a middle school. Lake Braddock and Hayfield must both be used to cure the SC problem.
A Middle School has already been contemplated and it is on the CIP for 2015. The question is what do we do from now until it is built, not IF it will be built. Do we leave SCSS OC? use HF? use HF and LB? move up the Middle School on the CIP? We will probably do a combination of all of these.
The only reason we are in this mess and I mean the ONLY reason is because someone had the bright idea to atke a High School, yes high school and convert it into a secondary school. Note, the capacity of all secondary schools is 4,000 and SCSS school capacity is 2,000. If they would have kept it as a igh school we would not be here today and our tax payers dollars could have been spent somewhere else.
Will any WSHS/LBSS pyramid split feeders be affected by this? I'd like my child to stay with his elementary friends and go to LBSS rather than split off to WSHS. Might the inevitable push of students from SCSS to LBSS crowd out such a possibility? That would be sad.
Didn't other High Schools start out as Secondary schools until a new middle school came along? I think that was the plan for South County and I don't think they expected the populations they have now right off the bat. It did not help that they offered the communty in South County a Junior class as this just made it worse and hurt Hayfields stability and programs. It also did not help the situation creating a large boundary for SCSS. They should have kept to a strict number and left some more at Hayfield and send some to Lake Braddock 2 years ago. If they had the foresight they could have sent the rising 7th graders next year from Newington Forest or part of Silverbrook to LBSS. Now they have a chance to fix it. I am still not convinced that after they adjust the SCSS boundary this year and next year that a middle school will ever be needed even in 2015. Oh 8:28, not all secondary school capicities are 4,000. Hayfield is 3,200. If it were 4,000 then South County would defintely never need a middle school.
8:28, you are so right. IF SC had been funded properly instead of through backroom deals, this ridiculous situation of being OC within a year would never have occurred.
Hayfield and LB must both be used to solve the SC overcapacity issues. Support Option 2B.
Nothing like that will happen in this boundary study and no students will be moved out of Lake Braddock. West Spirngifield is not part of this study. Don't know about the future, but for right now, this study involves 3 schools, H, SC and LB.
Unfortunately, the staff ignored the excess capacity at LBSS and only looked at HF and SCSS. All 3 schools need to used. We will have to review the situation in the future to determine if and when the Middle School is built, but 2015 is reasonable with today's information.
The 7-8 graders have to go to school somewhere. SCSS has to be a Secondary School until a MS is built. The plan there, like other growing areas, was as the area grew to build a MS - that is what is in the CIP now.
Please don't respond and say the MS students could go to LB or HF. That option has been shot full of holes and declared dead long ago.
If SCSS was not funded with "back room deals" then we would all be at an overcrowded Hayfield while other communities continued to to do "back room deals" and continue to ignore all of our needs for their own. At some point you have to stick up for yourself. If you think you can wait paitiently and you will be treated fairly -- keep waiting and see what happens.
It seems that no one on this blog cares about the Lorton Station community! They would become a split COMMUNITY under any of the recommendations (except option 1) so what does the School Board do to help them stay whole at SCSS? Perhaps trade some Halley or NF neighborhgoods that lie several miles away from SCSS?
I think the plan is that when LHES is built all of Lorton Station ES will go to HF and no longer be a split. I am not sure how they can do it without redoing the SS boundaries, but the best way for LS to avoid being a split is to join together at HF again.
Also, Option #1 would have created splits - serious splits. It just did them at the Middle School level instead of the Elementary level. Fortunately for everyone, that option is dead.
FCPS had never had shady deals regarding school financing until SCSS. Because of catering to loudmouths, the school was overcapacity within the first year. The school should have opened with 7th-10th grade only. The SCSS project pushed back the start dates for many desperately needed renovations on the CIP.
SCSS was not shady. You don't know what you are writing about and have little clue about what it took to build SCSS.It was a legit. county processs.
Catering to loudmouths has become SOP for the school board, (especially for certain members), even when it's at the obvious expense of the school system as a whole.
The SCSS project was done before onther projects because it was a higher priority. The SCSS project should have been SOONER, but was pushed back for years because the community did not stick up for themselves and waited around thinking life would be fair.
diligent in our efforts.
Politicians like the members of the School Board have an obligation to listen to citizens' concerns. If you want to call that listening to loudmouths go ahead. I call it listening to citizens that care enough to speak up. People who say nothing will get nothing. that is the way system works. That did not start with the building of SCSS, it started soon after Eve ate the apple.
In the spirit of 1:24, I am speaking up that the SB must vote for Option 2B. It is the best option that reduces the SC population to manageable levels.
Just think, we will be doing this again real soon.
The school board will probably move about 300 students from SC to HF in this study, it will be Lorton Station. They will be the lucky ones. South County will remain way OC and another study will have to take place. This will include, SC, LB & HF. We can thank all of our school board members for this.
If this was not a political process then we would be looking at option 2A or 2B and Lorton Valley would not be traded out for NF or SB. In Gary's own words and in the consultants own words LBSS has the most capacity of any shcool in Fairfax County to take new students (His responds to the SB). Yet, this process is political and we are not using the space and Yet we still have an overcrowded scholl at SCSS with the option now on the table. It is wrong and it is wrong to look to the East of 95 to take on this burden and it is wrong to ask HF to take on this burden. They did not ask for it and they do not deserve it. USE LBSS!
158,
I think you are correct. The board will leave LV and MN at SCSS and send only 300+ students to HF of which only about 200 of them will be at HF when they do the next study. At that time HF will still be phasing in students from Rose Hill as well.
We will be on the Fair boundaries 3.0 blog discussing Elementary School boundaries, Hagel Circle, BRAC and defending claims of "real" excess space at HF (they will not count the Rose Hill and LS kids that have got there yet to skew the numbers). LB and SB will continue to claim the space is not there.
We will go back to the 2004 and other boundary studies and rehash everything. This will continue until a MS is built and it is fed by LH, NF, SB, and Halley with no splits and no one east of I-95 in the pyramid.
3:01 - If it goes the way you think, the east side of I95 needs to really get motivated. Tell as many people as you can to e-mail the SB and send them a strong message.
The Board will not leave both MN and LV. Too many kids at SCSS and not enough immediate relief.
If a new middle school is built there will be no reason to leave E-95 out of the South County pyramid.
Don't kid yourself. Do you really think that East of I95 will ever be allowed back into Bradsher High School?
good point, maybe she will advocate bringing more of Fairfax Station in the South County pyrimid to use the space in the event a new middle school is built.
Then again maybe she will assist in making sure Mt. Vernon is used to its full potential. Now isn't that an overdue thought?
And how would Mt. Vernon be used, it is much too far for Silverbrook to go.
You are so right, pehaps we should relook at those areas east as you pointed out in your subliminal statement 6:55
Lets,
who goes to Mount Vernon?
Left Out of the Boundary
Lorton Station, Lorton Valley parents speak out against recommendation to send their children to Hayfield Secondary
By Amber Healy
January 31, 2007
Fairfax County Public Schools
Lorton Valley and Lorton Station children would be taken out of South County Secondary and reassigned to Hayfield Secondary if the Fairfax County School Board adopts the current recommendation to alter the boundaries there.
Greg Schuckman has been paying careful attention to the boundary study at South County Secondary school. He attended community meetings and spoke at the public hearing in January.
He is an anomaly in his Lorton Station neighborhood, one of apparently a handful of parents in Lorton who knew their children might be reassigned to Hayfield Secondary school at the end of the boundary study, which will be voted on by the School Board in just three weeks.
"In Lorton Station we have an e-mail listserv, but unless I put a message out there, nothing comes out," said Schuckman, who said the lapse in information may have been fixed through a stronger homeowner's association or chain of communication.
Most parents in Lorton Station or Lorton Valley knew little to nothing about the study, they say, their only notice coming in the form of a flyer distributed to students during the first few weeks of school. As a result, they now want the School Board to reconsider moving their children to Hayfield, instead opting to make no changes until given their fair chance to speak out.
"We were left out of everything," said Mel Garcia, a Lorton Valley resident who does not currently have children in school. The principle of keeping all residents in the area informed and at South County has motivated him to fight to keep Lorton Station and Lorton Valley in the South County pyramid.
"I don't think it's fair. Our community is probably a lot closer other than ones on Silverbrook Road," he said. "We can practically walk to the school."
Lorton Station resident Karen Luffred said she remembers seeing the flyer last fall but didn't keep track of the proceedings until she heard about the recommendation.
"The whole reason they did a boundary study so quickly was because the school was so overcrowded, but this recommendation doesn't bring South County back under capacity," said Luffred, "Why are they putting everyone through this if it won't get the capacity under 100 percent?"
Luffred said she doesn't understand why the staff recommendation didn't suggest the School Board take advantage of the capacity that was found at Lake Braddock Secondary by the McKibben Group, a consulting firm that was hired for $150,000 to evaluate the School Board's enrollment projecting process last summer.
Luffred and many other Lorton Station and Lorton Valley residents feel the School Board expected residents to check their Web site for information, something that might not be fair to those parents who do not have a computer or Internet connection at home.
"It's not fair for Lorton children to be the sacrificial lamb in all this," said Lorton Valley resident Kevin Morse. "The line of demarcation is (Interstate) 95 for this school, that's why we got pulled into this to begin with. They pulled us up and grabbed us."
Lorton Valley children account for 116 students at South County, a slightly larger number that the nearly 90 from Mason Neck, which is currently slated to stay at South County. But because Lorton Valley is closer, Morse believes his community has a better argument for remaining at South County.
LORTON VALLEY is one of the newer communities in Lorton, and residents there have been working hard to create a sense of identity through block parties, holiday celebrations and participation in school events.
Morse said his 14-year-old daughter has been happy at South County since the school opened, when she left private school to join the new community created there.
"She felt right at home there from the start," Morse said. "We bought our house because we wanted her to go to this school."
Another reason Morse advocates a delay in action is the still-unknown impact of the 22,000 new residents and their families moving to Fort Belvoir or the Engineer Proving Ground in Springifeld as a result of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) changes, which could possibly increase enrollment at both South County and Hayfield.
"We need to look at the long-term plan and build a middle school to fix this problem," he said.
Plus, the question remains as to what fiscal impact any changes to South County's boundary may have in the future.
"If they had told me my daughter would go here for a year and then have to switch schools, I wouldn't have bought my home," said Morse, who added that resale value of his home might decrease if students are sent to Hayfield.
James Ransdell shares Morse's concerns, both about his daughter's ability to play sports at South County and the greater impact of whatever the boundary decision might state.
"What I'd like to see, rather than Fairfax County build another elementary school, is to build a middle school instead," said Ransdell, suggesting what many parents across the current South County boundary consider the only real answer to overcrowding.
"I think the best idea is to vote to do nothing," he said. "That would give us some time to be more engaged in the process. Most parents effected don't know anything about what's being discussed. We never knew until two or three weeks ago when it was almost too late."
Lorton Valley resident Harold Henson said he'd go so far as to suggest the School Board not change anything and leave the split schedule devised this year to make the most of the school's space to keep all the students together.
"The principal [Dale Rumberger] is doing a fine job, everything's working out well," Henson said. "Doing nothing is a good option."
Henson does not have any school-aged children attending South County or any of the surrounding schools, but feels he must speak out.
"If one group has to suffer, we all should," said Henson, adding that he believes the best option, if the School Board must do something, is to vote for Option One, which would revert South County into a high school by sending students in middle school to Lake Braddock or Hayfield.
WITH A 3-YEAR-OLD son at home, Henson said he and his wife intended to live in their Lorton Valley home for at least 20 years, so their son could graduate from South County.
"Now we're being told no, you're not going to that school, you're going to Hayfield," he said. "Even my wife, who graduated from Hayfield, said no, we want him to go to South County."
Another Lorton Station resident, Tom Stanley, agreed that Option One is the only solution on the table worth considering.
"Right now Lorton is singled out," he said. "The option [that was] recommended really is prejudicial against our area over others that are farther away. Given the fact that we're only two miles from school it's frustrating. It does not solve overcrowding problem."
With only a few weeks left until the School Board makes its decision, Schuckman said he is organizing his neighbors to fight together against the option in the hopes of changing the fate of their children. He is also advocating the School Board choose Option One, to keep all children together for high school while taking them out for middle school.
However, he believes the School Board has another option.
"There's funding in the queue to have Laurel Hill Elementary on-line in 2009, which is needed to relieve overcrowding at the other three elementary schools. That problem would be solved if we built a middle school for grades six through eight instead," Schuckman suggested. "This addresses the real capacity issues and it balances the pyramid. We can solve all the problems down here with the exception of a few parents in Laurel Hill who would be upset you're taking away their neighborhood elementary school."
Lorton is going to feel singled out if the current recommendation goes ahead. At least 2A and 2B took neighborhoods from both sides of South County.
Lorton???Laurel Hill is in Lorton, Cavenaugh Crossing is in Lorton,
Crosspointe is in Lorton,
Gunston Corner, Laurel Highlands, Occoquan Overlook, South Pointe Estates, Lorfax Heights all in Lorton.
Crosspointe is in Fairfax Station.
647,
Wasn't Liz leading the pack to send all of Gunston ES (including Mason Neck) to Mt. Vernon years ago -- before SCSS was built and HF was way overcrowded? I suspect that would still be in her plans.
Part of Crosspointe is in the Lorton Zip Code. I think most people that grew up here and know the area consider Lorton as the areas near Rt. one and I-95. We have a library, a volunteer fire station and a community that has long been an area suffering from its location next to the DC prison. The area along Rt. 123 next the the prison was always separated from the Old Lorton area East of 95 by the prison and farmland. With the closure of the prison large developement has taken place and it would be a shame if old lorton is left out of the new school while new residents with no real connection to Lorton are allowed to enjoy the fruits of a new school while never having to live with the stigma of calling Lorton home.
As far as all of Gunston goint to Mt. Vernon, I know alot of those families and that would destroy what little community they have in going to Hayfield and South County. The folks going to Hayfield like Hayfield, sending them up Rt.1 to Mt. Vernon would be as bad for them as it was for Silverbrook to go to Hayfield.
8:15.
You generalized far too much about the west side. If you felt you suffered due to the prison then why did you not move???
Sorry, but your analysis does not cut it. It doesn't matter who lived here when, etc. We all contribute to county taxes and we all work hard to make a living.
Your statement falls short of logic. County natives live everywhere in this county not just on your little island of east Lorton. Sorry to be so blunt.
My family moved here to Lorton generations ago to work at the prison. I should not say I "suffered" but this area did not enjoy the same economic developement that the rest of the county enjoyed until the prison closed. Now a public school is located within miles of Lorton and my area is being asked to sacrifice and go back to Hayfield. Old Lorton has never had a chance to improve, now that we are seeing growth we are getting the rug pulled out from under us which just may put us two steps back. Give us a chance to become a thriving diverse community. Why should we be left out and the West side continue to go to SCSS. I am just as close if not closer to SCSS then parts of Silverbrook and Newington Station. Why don't you move if you want to stay at SCSS?
There is only so much room at SCSS. Somebody from SCSS needs to use and enjoy the readily available space at the newly renovated LBSS and HF.
I suspect there will be people that move or choose private school based on the new boundaries.
Your argument makes little sense. Many of us could argue the same premise as yourself and yet we live west of you.
SCSS was not built as a mega school. Everyone knew this. No area is asked to be a sacrificial lamb. Was Silvebrook and Newington Forest that lamb for 20 years at Hayfield?
It's time to understand the issue for what it is and move on.
I agree. The issue is that
A. SC is OC
B. H&LB both have seats for SC overflow.
C. The SB must use both H and LB to solve SC.
on 8:49's comments
the financial justification from this county for much of what has occurred is the redevelopement of the Lorton area. Look at documents on planning and zoning as well as the EDA-Economic Developement Authority. It is very sad that such areas are the ones to be excluded from SCSS . I also loked up the lcoation of Silverline Dr. That area is not as far NW as areas which should attend LB. Not only that the Silverline area is one which could even be in the Laurel boundary. Some streets asigned to Newingon Forest could go to Hayfield. Saratoga should go to Hayfield.
Here is what I would do with Mount Vernon. Turn it into a small secondary school. Move some Whitman/MV areas into Sandburg/WP. There is a 35 plus classroom deficit for MV and West Potomac in 2011. Whitman has a 899 capacity. It could be an elementary school.
I don't know why Silverbrook and Newington Forest were not in the Lake Braddock pyramid or the West Springfield pyramid 20 years ago. You knew how far Hayfield was when you moved there and I knew how far Hayfield was when I was growing up here in Lorton. Lorton did not have another school closer then Hayfield however Fairfax Station does. I understand the issue full well, Lorton is being moved out of South County so that Silverbrook and Newington Forest can stay. That is the bottom line issue. My family and I went to Hayfield since it opened, how long did you and your family have to commute to Hayfield?
20 years. All the while traveling through other school boundaries to get to a school 12 miles away. Now we have a school down the street. So tell me again about fairness.
If you didn't like the commute to Hayfield then why did you staty here so long? We always had hopes of a new school here. The land was here and so was the population.
What does shifting things around at Mount Vernon and West Potomac have anything to do with this discussion. This is about SCSS,LBSS, and HSS.
We cannot move enough of Lorton Station out of SCSS to Hayfield for Silverbrook and NF to stay. None of the plans offered so far accoplish that task. However, the more they can move the less that needs to move. That is why the SB folks want the delay. Get as much to HF this time and then try again in two years -- and throw in MV. Delay, delay delay until we can get a Middle School - THEN we can choose who gets to go to that school.
We need a plan to use LBSS now or this will go on forever. Even if it is just a little at a time. Like someone suggested only rising 7th graders.
We also had hopes for a new school here as well. You have a school closer then 12 miles called Lake Braddock. I am also close to SCSS, why should I have to go and you stay?
950
It appears that the staff made this about HSS and SCSS and left LB out of the picture.
MV comes up because it is undercapacity and shares a large geographic border with SCSS (or at least it does now). The mantra from those trying to avoid LBSS during the hearings was "look to the east for space". They want to delay the decision on using LBSS and include MV in the picture next time.
MV should watch what is happening. They should try and get their utilization of capacity up on their own - or at least create the perception that they have little available space. So far, they have been successful at using the "no space at the Middle School" trick, but it may not last once LB is on the SB.
925 actual empty seats at Hayfield, 2 years ago you were in the Hayfield boundary and loving it.
No seats yet available at LBSS, never in that boundary, SCSS in walking distance and school, the list can go on---it has all been said before.
925 empty seats is bs and you know it. We are talking about the future, todays enrollment at Hayfield means nothing. Lake Braddock is the only school of the three with enrollment going down over the next 6 years. Facilities knows that, McKibbon Knows that and Silverbrook Knows that. Use LBSS and Hayfield and the problem is solved.
No it is not BS. The truth is there are 925 empty seats at hayfield and they are unsure of porjections at LBSS. McKibbon stated the area at LB is an anonomaly. The area regenerates and recetn growth in that area has not been captured nor identified. If you want to talk McKibbon then talk about all of his remarks just not one sound bite that you believe solves the problem because of your negaitve bias about SBrook. Future enrollment at Hayfield means everything and the now, the 925 empty seats, seats where SCSS students came from means a great deal.
YEt the students who attended HF are not the ones going back. Instead you are sending Lorton Station students, Lorton Valley students, Sanger Place Apt students to a school they were NEVER apart of. On your logic those students who attended HF before SCSS should be going back. That would make sense, right? However, it does not work that way in your world and this process has not been fair and just.
925 seats today means nothing, what do you want to do pull kids out of SCSS Monday and use those seats. What are the projected seats next year that is what you need to look at. We still have not seen the impact of the last boundary study moving kids from Rosehill area to Hayfield. I have no bias against Silverbrook, send Newington forest I could care less. Mckibbon has also been quoted as saying that a buffer should be maintained at Hayfield for the same reasons as Lake Braddock. Just admit you will skew the argument or blow smoke to keep anyone from using Lake Braddock. Well if that is allowed to happend then the logical result is using Hayfield once again to solve all the problems. That should not be allowed. Why are you not advocating to do nothing if you think a new middle school is coming? Is that not the fight or do you just want to kick certain communities out. Look I want kids to comeback to Hayfield just not too many creating an overcrowdeed school. LBSS should want the same otherwise they will start cutting programs and staff as the enrollments go down.
It has been just, perhaps not always fair. But the prorcess identified by FCPS is taking place. It is flawed but it is what we have to deal with now. The town meeting have taken place, the public hearing has taken place, you have been given ample time like others to lobby your case. Is it right LV goes back to Hayfield, no. So who will go back??? What modification(s) should be made for Hayfield so LV stays as SCSS? (By the way Lorton STation was a part of Hayfield, so was Sanger Place, and the homes in that area. You should know that if you area a native.)
I am a native and have lived in Lorton Station north since 2000. The children went to Lee not Hayfield. Everyone has managed to convince themselves including the SB we went to HF. We did not. Sorry!
Yes in north Lorton Station they did go to Lee, but not in South Lorton Station and those going to Lee were only a handful. LS was quick to cut off the east for Hayfield, thus splitting the LS ES community. Good for you, you're a native. So what does that mean in all this again?
The projections at all schools have a margin of error, but the bottomline is that both LBSS and HF are projected to have 750-800 empty seats each in 2011 if we do nothing. Those are REAL numbers based on research and verified by an ourside consultant. If we do not use those numbers to guide our decisions then we have nothing but pure emotion. We have to use some logic.
The amount of empty seats at LBSS and Hayfield today is absolutely meaningless. The board must consider the impact of previous decisions and boundary changes along with the population of the feeder schools. When you do that HF will have 781 and LB 753 empty seats and SCSS will be over by 963 if we do nothing. Of course these numbers are predictions and there is some error. Hayfield has over 150 more kids than predicted this year! LB had ... well about 30 more than predicted.
We should leave room for that error at both schools and only send @400-500 to each of them. It makes no sense to use Hayfield and not LB when BOTH SCHOOLS have over 750 REAL spaces.
1135
LB has over 750 empty seats avaialbable to rising Freshmen. There is room from LV to stay at SCSS if we properly use Lake Braddock. Either Option 2A or 2B would work -- there is probably enough room for LV and MN to stay, but that would not fully utilize HF.
Thank you 11:55, I was hoping you would pipe in on this because I could not remember the numbers.
I have a question for our friends to the west. If the recommendation is approved and we wait on using Lake Braddock, in two years a new middle school is not approved to be funded or moved up will you want to then go to LBSS? And I am not just asking Silverbrook families but also Newington Forest. You see in two years Hayfield will still be under capacity so I am wondering if You will lobby again to remove more from the east to avoid being sent to LBSS.
Everyone needs to remember the original purpose of SCSS: to relieve kids coming from Halley, SB, NF from having the long commute to Hayfield. The school board messed things up by adding too many others such as Mason Neck. The existing capacity is on the east. These are real seats, not projected seats. If LV wants to return to Lee that helps.
Lake Braddock is much closer for NF and SB, You can go there to relieve the overcapacity of SCSS. Overcrowding at SCSS is the issue today, a solution is available, your not entitled to this new school.
SCSS was built because the county was growing - especially in the area of SCSS and the exiting school capacity could not handle it. It was not built to relieve long drives and it certainly was not for specific Elementary schools. Much of NF went to Lee, not HF. Even if that was true, it would be irelevent now.
The board messed up and sent too many too fast to SCSS, but Mason Neck and everyone who goes there now has as much claim to SCSS as anyone else. The border schools in this study have over 750 empty spaces each and we need to use them.
1256
The space at HF and LB is projected as is the excess capacity at SCSS. What do you mean by "real seats, not projected seats"? It sounds illiterate. Every thing is based on projections. How is one projection more real than the other? Explain please.
Folks -- as a commenter just mentioned, the comment thread on this post is simply getting too long and takes forever to scroll and post to. I will leave this comment thread up for viewing but am closing down TODAY the ability to comment on this particular post and all posts that have come before it. A new post will go up shortly on the front page alerting folks to the School Board decision on Feb. 22. I would also like to eventually provide within that post some sort of "matrix" or list of pros and cons of all options on the table for all neighborhoods/areas affected by this decision within the next week or so. (See my plea for help above in this comment thread.) If you want to comment, please do so on the post that will go up in the next few minutes. Thanks
Post a Comment