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 601 – 800 of 2729 Newer› Newest»Stress on the system? All that does is DeLay, obscure, and generate unnecesary expense. Transportation can figure out where to drive the bus. FCPS owns books so let it shift them to receiving schools along with loads of teachers.
So is the Falls Church island in the middle of Annandale high school.
3:43, The Woodson Island was actually due to Michelle Brickner as was the Afton Glen Island that goes to LB.
In terms of 2A or 2B, it does no good to delay a year or two so that SC remains overcapacity and LB remains under.
We are talking of 2A and 2B, but F&P have stopped staffing them.
I think some of you are underestimating how difficult it will be to make these boundary changes on the staff and faculty. Giving them more time and focusing the planning resources on one move at a time will be more effective.
Maybe we can have some islands come out of SC? How about if we send all of Halley to LB and Silverbrook to Hayfield. Then have all of Lorton Station go to SC.
How much time do they need? This process is only difficult politically.
Some of Halley could go to LB, but Silverbrook to Hayfield will never happen. It is best to focus on options that are still possible, like 2A and 2B.
Let's vote for 2A. This is the best option for all. It keeps part of LS at SC. It will get rid of split feeder schools. It allows ES schools to stay together! Best option out of all of them! Done Deal!!!
Doing all segments of 2B is much more effective. Give Crosspointe and Barrington an inch and they will take a mile! Let's promote only the western side implementation of 2B and you will see them scream about the injstice.
Why make trouble? 2A will make everybody happy. This is the best option!
2A is fine, but I doubt it makes the Newington Forest or Mason Neck people happy. I still like the CA Plan.
Hayfield needs kids now, so the SC to HF portion should go first and relieve the pressure. Let the impact of the renovations at LB be realized before we send another 500 kids there.
CA PLAN CA PLAN
The impact of the LB renovations are already being felt. The 7th and 8th graders are already in classroooms. Don't pretend that LB isn't ready and just be glad the SB doesn't make you move in April.
904,
ok, so LB is ready for the CA Plan
The SB needs to be sent as many letters and emails from the rest of the SC area supporting 2B as there are letters coming from Silverbrook against it.
The lastest Amber Healy article from the Connection.
New Option, New Problems
Presented with option to build middle school, parents still not happy with boundary study
By Amber Healy
November 9, 2006
Important Dates
Staff from the Office of Facilities Planning will present its recommendations to the School Board on Thursday, Dec. 21 at 7 p.m. at Jackson Middle School. Parents will then have a few weeks to sign up for two nights of public hearings, scheduled for Jan. 8 and 9, starting at 7 p.m. at Jackson Middle School. The School Board will make its final decision during a regular meeting on Thursday, Feb. 22 at 7 p.m., also at Jackson Middle School.
Feedback from the small group discussions during Wednesday night’s meeting will soon be posted at www.fcps.edu, and parents are encouraged to e-mail their concerns and comments to Boundaries@fcps.edu.
Photo by Amber Healy/The Connection
Parents from Hayfield, Lake Braddock and South County Secondary schools packed the auditorium at South County last Wednesday for the second public meeting regarding a possible boundary change for those schools.
Photo by Amber Healy/The Connection
Gary Chevalier, chair of the Fairfax County Public School Office of Facilities Planning, goes over some details of the options for boundaries at South County, Lake Braddock and Hayfield Secondary schools.
Finding himself once again on the wrong side of frustrated parents, Gary Chevalier tried to buy some time.
Chevalier, director of the Fairfax County Public Schools Office of Facilities Planning, presented a new third option in the boundary study of Hayfield, Lake Braddock and South County Secondary schools: send some students from the lower portion of the current South County boundary to Hayfield for two years and try to find funding for a middle school in the meantime.
The demand for a South County Middle School was the most common solution expressed by parents following the first boundary study meeting in October, Chevalier said, which led him to create the third possible outcome of the boundary study.
“Parents also asked us to delay a boundary change and to consider what impact, if any, we’d feel from BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) at Fort Belvoir,” Chevalier said. He also said parents were concerned about overcrowding Lake Braddock, currently in the final stages of a multi-million dollar renovation and suggestions to have a county-wide boundary study to ease overcrowding across Fairfax County.
“In some groups, there was the misconception that we were planning to come back here in two years and build a middle school, which is not true,” said Chevalier, to the several hundred parents gathered in the South County auditorium and those who watched on closed circuit television in the school’s cafeteria. “According to the (Capital Improvement Plan), the middle school is in the 2015 time frame for being funded. We’re not taking it out of the CIP, but that’s where it will remain.”
Chevalier said that if by some chance the money for a middle school turned up tomorrow, he’d happily accept a check to make that happen.
“If there’s a way to come up with a free middle school, how wonderful would that be?” Chevalier said. “Unfortunately, that hasn’t come up yet.”
FOR THE NOV. 1 meeting, Chevalier said parents were to discuss Option One, which would remove all middle school students and send them to either Hayfield or Lake Braddock and make South County strictly a high school, and the newly unveiled Option Three.
In Option Three, Chevalier explained, students from the Lorton Valley, Lorton Station and Mason Neck areas would be sent to Hayfield starting with students in seventh, eighth and ninth grades next fall. No students would be sent to Lake Braddock in this plan.
South County is already projected to be over 700 students over capacity next year, an estimated 3,230 students in a school built for 2,500.
If accepted by the School Board, the population at South County would decrease from 3,230 to 2,934 students for the 2007-08 school year and from 3,463 students down to 2,834 students by 2011-12, Chevalier said. The school would still be overcrowded, but this would provide some immediate relief to the school, he said.
The population at Hayfield would grow from a projected 2,329 students to 2,625 in 2007-08 and up from 2,444 to 3073 by 2011-12, Chevalier said. The school would be 95.3 percent utilized, with a capacity of 3,225 students.
No changes would be made to Lake Braddock in order to allow enrollment numbers to settle after the renovation is completed, Chevalier said.
Essentially, the first phase of Option Three buys both the School Board and the South County community time to find funding for a middle school. It also provides time for better information on the number of students and families moving into the area because of BRAC changes, which are to be in place by September 2012.
If funding for a middle school is not secured by fall 2008, a second boundary study would be conducted in conjunction with one for the planned Laurel Hill Elementary school, which may redirect some students to Lake Braddock, Chevalier said.
However, if the community is successful in raising money for a middle school, no students would be sent to Lake Braddock, but a second study may be necessary to bring back students sent to Hayfield, Chevalier explained.
BEFORE TAKING QUESTIONS from parents, Chevalier was sure to say that while Options 2A and 2B were not included in the papers handed out at the start of the meeting, the options were still available for the School Board members to consider.
“Depending on your reactions tonight, at least at the staff level, Option 2A and 2B may be off the table,” Chevalier said. “But to the School Board, everything we’ve presented is still up for consideration.”
School staff members are scheduled to make their recommendations to the School Board for any boundary changes during a meeting on Thursday, Dec. 21.
Opening the floor to questions, Chevalier was asked why a middle school wasn’t created out of the former Lorton prison building right next to the high school.
“We have the sites picked out for the middle school,” he said. “We have a place, we just don’t have the money.”
A parent in the middle of the auditorium asked Chevalier what the guarantee was that South County students sent to Hayfield would be brought back if a middle school were built.
“To me, the only reason we’re here tonight is because someone didn’t like the outcome of the first study,” the woman said.
A South County father asked why South County was built to house only 2,500 students, when both Hayfield and Lake Braddock, built to be secondary schools over 30 years ago, have capacities of over 3,000 and 4,000 students, respectively.
“No matter how you tweak it, this school will be over capacity,” the man said. “Fairfax County is growing by leaps and bounds, especially here. We need this middle school.”
One Lake Braddock mother asked Chevalier how she and the other parents could be expected to make educated comments and provide thoughtful insight on the third option when they only received the information that night.
Patricia Fausser also informed Chevalier that while he said the cafeteria at Lake Braddock could fit all the students into four lunch periods without problem, the school currently has five lunch periods and students are still cramped.
“Kids can’t get through the halls between classes as it is,” she said, urging him to reconsider adding students to Lake Braddock.
Christopher Pavalokos, a junior class representative from Lake Braddock, invited Chevalier to spend a day walking through the halls at the school, to see for himself just how much room is available.
“You say there’s all this room, I’d like to know where it is,” he said.
Chevalier said he’d be happy to meet Christopher at the school for lunch one day, which earned him applause and laughs from the parents.
The greatest concern expressed by Hayfield parents is what they believe is an inaccurate estimation of the extra capacity at their school.
“You can’t look at the capacity of Hayfield without looking at the separate categories,” said Ed Joseph. While there may be extra capacity in the high school, adding middle school students to Hayfield would overcrowd that portion of the building, which is divided into two areas with common core facilities, like a cafeteria and auditorium, in the middle.
“You can’t just look at the health of South County, you have to look at the health of Lake Braddock and Hayfield too,” Joseph said. “If you’re sending kids back to us, it should be all grades so as to not ruin the character of Hayfield.”
Another Hayfield parent, Dick Reed, told Chevalier that he’d asked several education professionals what the impact would be on students if Option 1 were chosen as the answer.
After contacting representatives from the Center for Mental Health in Schools, the National Association of School Psychologists, the American Association of School Counselors and the National School Board Association, Reed said he was repeatedly told removing middle school students only to bring them back to a different secondary school for their last four years is a dangerous thing to do.
“I really think Option 2, either A or B, is superior,” Reed said. “I think the students should either be moved to one school or the other and left alone, not move them back and forth.”
All the options harm the communities, he said, but the damage caused in Option One is “avoidable.”
FOLLOWING THE MEETING, Crosspointe resident Bob Falkenstein said he was disappointed that Chevalier didn’t call on him during the question and answer segment of the meeting.
“What I’d like to know is how much property the School Board has available that we might be able to put on the market for sale, where the proceeds could be used to pay for the middle school?” he said. “We haven’t heard about this option.”
Once again, a petition in support of building a South County Middle School was available outside the auditorium doors; this time 91 parents had signed it by the end of the meeting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2003 Connection Newspapers. All Rights Reserved.
Contact Us — Editorial | Contact Us — Advertising
We should start using ALL school before a middle school is built. Hayfield is at 71% capacity and Mount Vernon is at 68% capacity. These schools should be utilized and not waste tax payers $$$. Money should be use to update older schools such as, Robinson, West Springfield, Woodson and many others before we start building a new middle school! Lake Braddock is at 97% capacity TODAY! Let wait and see how that school is before we shove more students into it. Hayfield and Mount Vernon have both been renovated and need to be utilized! They are beautiful schools, all schools in Fairfax County are good schools, and let’s use them. It’s a big mistake not to take advantage of these schools!!
MV is not in the study. LB and H are in the study. Both of those schools need to be used to solve the oc issues at SC. LB is not at 97% capacity when the renovation is completed in April. Silverbrook's new agenda is to implement the Eastern side of 2 and then conveniently "forget" about the west side that needs to get redistricted to LB.
Option 2 (either of them) remove about the same number of kids. It's up to the SB to decide if it should be Newington Forest-2A or the Silverbrook area-2B.
MV is not in the study. LB and H are in the study. Both of those schools need to be used to solve the oc issues at SC. LB is not at 97% capacity when the renovation is completed in April. Silverbrook's new agenda is to implement the Eastern side of 2 and then conveniently "forget" about the west side that needs to get redistricted to LB.
Option 2 (either of them) remove about the same number of kids. It's up to the SB to decide if it should be Newington Forest-2A or the Silverbrook area-2B.
11/12/2006 2:27 PM
LB is at 97% capacity, and that is using 4075 capacity number. That is the number of seats LB will have when the reno is completed. Go look at the FCPS web site. They have all the numbers!
Option #3 sends too many kids to Hayfield and makes a fake promise to send them back when a middle school is built. If F&P decides to delay the SB/NF move to LBSS, then stick with the boundaries in option 2A/B.
If LB is at 97% then the GTC should be moved out to make room for the Silverbrook kids next year.
Mount Vernon needs to be included in this study, they are at 68%. All schools need to be used!!
We should not make LB overcrowded, but they have some room and will have more in the future. Start phasing some kids in now at the 7th grade level and all will be fine. Moving the GTC to make room should be seriously considered.
If MV was in the study Gunston could go there and all of Lorton Station and probably Newington Forest could go to Hayfield.
Why should the GTC be moved out of LB. Let's use MV 68% and HFSS 71%.
2:48,
Newington Forest or Lorton Station alone would fill Hayfield, which is fine, but both would overcrowd Hayfield.
It is plain to see that the agenda of the Silverbrook and Newington Forest folks is to say,do, or come up with any excuse to get moved out of SCSS. Ultimately, they want the Mason Neck folks out of SCSS as well as Lorton Station as they feel they never should have been allowed at SCSS in the first place. The fact is Mount Vernon is not in this study and there are too many kids in both these schools to send to Hayfield without overcrowding Hayfield. Lake Braddock is basically full this year. But this study is about the future and the fact is more room is coming to Lake Braddock while more kids are coming to South County if nothing is changed. Sure go ahead and fill Hayfield, but unless you overcrowd Hayfield or leave South County overcrowed, you must phase students into Lake Braddock.
Lake Braddock will be at 80% in five years. Lets plan to use that renovated space. Hayfield will be used, Mount Vernon is not in this study. Ignoring the facts will not make them go away.
2:48 and silverbrook could go to LBSS
2A is the way to go. It doesn't overcrowd Hayfield, it reduces the OC a little bit more than 2A by sending more kids to Lake Braddock.
I still like the CA Plan. Option #2 boundaries for Hayfield and then send enough kids from Silverbrook to LB for 7th and 8th grade to get SCSS unders 95%. SB can come back to SCSS for HS. Not a great plan but better than the options presented so far.
Don't forget the Phase II is still part of the CA PLAN. It gets SCSS under or just over capacity, depending on how the number work out, but I would do only about 150 to 190 middle school kids to hold the line of further overcrowding at SCSS while still not overdoing LBSS
Option 2A. NF doesn't do anything for SC anyway.
The CA plan must be a Silverbrook idea. It moves the Lorton Station kids permanently, while it gives Silverbrook/NF options for moving the middle school children back to SCSS at a later date. Why should some communities be moved permanently while others have options? Option 2A or 2B, and no middle school.
Ditto but I endorse 2B over 2A.
Hayfield needs and want High School and Middle School students and students need to have as much stabilization as possible. There needs to be a permanent move of kids to HF. LS already goes to HF. CA just adds a little more of it. When LHES is built LS could cease to be a split feeder all together and Lorton could feed HF.
Option 3 is more of a SC/Silverbrook idea. It sends ALL of Lorton Station (just about) to HF (overcrowds HF) with a "promise" to bring them back if/when a MS is built. No one paying attention really believes they will come back. Why would they want to? HF is a great school, it will just be a little overcapacity. Why jerk kids around and send them back again?
#3 really sets things up nice for SC community as they are able to rid themselves of Mason Neck and Lorton, but remain overcrowded enough to continue the "Need a Middle School" mantra. #3 also creates the image that LBSS is at capacity and cannot take them, leaving the MS as the only option. The fact that it sends too many kids to HF does not resonate.
Option 3 doesn't help any of the 3 secondary schools. It keeps SC way over capacity as compared to
the other options (creating a "need" for a ms), it sends too many kids back to Hayfield too fast, and it allows LB to become way undercapacity, putting that school at risk of losing programs and teachers because of too few students.
8:12 - you are right. Option 3 is a nice "set-up" to give the Silverbrook/NF/Halley parents every single thing they want. Do you think they designed option 3, sent it to Gary and the last step is to have it approved by the school board?
^^^ Yes, particularly in phase II where the next decision will be in line with the LHES boundary decision -- that is when they will get their "undesirables on the other side of I-95" out of their pyramid.
Phase II is also after the election so they will have the opportunity to elect Liz, et al and have the votes they needs to delay the move long enough to make it all happen.
Liz doesn't seem to realize that the Springfield District isn't just Silverbrook area. Sheis too shortsighted and focused only on her own HOA rather than wanting to help the entire community. She has a lot of enemies who wouldn't elect her dogcatcher.
I know they designed option 3 and it was listed as an option because of politicians. Since Chevalier is on staff at FCPS I assume he was told be Dale and Dale was told by school board members to include option 3 as an item under consideration.
Could there be repercussions at the state level? Since state politicians don't all represent the advocates of Option 3 nor do all represent Fairfax County, this option and even any expense involved with it's presentation urther impact all funding to this county. Meanwhile you have gerry Connelly fighting for daycare money for the working poor and such machinations by Bradsher and Co do not help his efforts.
On another current boundary change process citizens submitted a proposal and it was shown as a proposal not an option under consideration on Chevalier's second meeting.
Is there any chance that this nightmare can end for Hayfield. Noone disputes that Hayfield needs more students or should get more students. For Hayfield it is a matter of how many. I would like to see Hayfield have boundaries set this year leaving enough room to account for margin of errors in projections and the possible inflow of numbers due to BRAC over the next five years. Set them now for Hayfield and leave this school out of the fight to come in 2008 when Laurel Hill comes on line. Is that asking too much?
If Hayfield does get too many students do you (HF) still want to be left out in 2008 when LHES comes on line?
11:37 - It is asking too much to ask any community to "set" their boundary, or to ask any school to do the same with so much uncertainty. Are you a Hayfield parent? Communities such as Mason Neck and Lorton Station may not like your suggestions. Are you a Silverbrook parent trying to push Mason Neck and Lorton Station out?
OK, 12:08 if students are coming back to Hayfield who would they be? I am a Hayfield parent and don't care who it is that comes back, be it Mason Neck, Lorton Station or Newington Forest for that matter. All I want is a school that is not going to be overcrowded again in a few years. Do you really think that if a "free" middle school is built, those that are sent back to Hayfield will be welcomed back to SCSS. No you'll see, that school would magically fill up with the haves while the have nots are left holding the bag. Silverbrook couldn't wait to leave Hayfield, Mason Neck wanted a shorter bus ride, Lorton Station says SCSS is a Lorton School and they should go. If I had my way I would fill the seats at Hayfield with kids closer to Hayfield like Groveton, or more of Rose Hill, but that ain't happening. This overcrowding at SCSS could have been avoided for another couple years if folks didn't insist on having a Junior Class. Fine they left and now are crowded and they left Hayfield's faculty and programs in a mess. Now we face a "South County" overcrowding crisis and who is the easy target to fix it? HAYFIELD! Well I say enough it enough, the School Board and "South County communities" allowed this mess to happen so I say they should fix it but I also say STOP JERKING HAYFIELD AROUND! Give us 500 kids keep us undercapacity and let us out of this fight. We know you don't want to be associated with Hayfield, well too bad, MOVE!. Build a Middle school or don't, but don't leave us hanging again for another 2 years. The SB needs to standup and make the tough choice, someone has to leave SCSS and go to LBSS because Hayfield cannot do it all. BOTTOM LINE!
12:46 - I understand your position. However, Hayfield is not in the driver seat here Silverbrook is, and I don't like it any more than you do. If you agree to "set" your boundary, what happens if BRAC turns out bigger than anyone predicted? Are these other schools/communities who have the school board in their pocket going to help out Hayfield? I don't think so. Yes, Hayfield has to take more kids now, but don't be too quick to agree to set boundaries, could be a mistake in the future. As far as I am concerned 2A or 2B works fine for now, and uses Lake Braddock as well as Hayfield. Under both of those options, a middle school may only be necessary Hayfield ends up overcrowded again due to BRAC. Then more of Lorton Station will have to go to SC, and other moves made.
Because Silverbrook is driving this is why I say set the Hayfield boundry now. Sure it is a Risk with BRAC that Hayfield could see more students then expected, but the way I see it is if Silverbrook and LBSS get Option 3 NOW, Hayfield boundries will be set NOW and close to overcapacity, because after all this I don't see any chance that if a middle school is built, some of those kids are going back so again Hayfield is left holding the bag. So the choice is, do we take a chance of being overcrowed later, or do we accept that option 3 goes and we are overcrowded now.
Because Silverbrook is driving this is why I say set the Hayfield boundry now. Sure it is a Risk with BRAC that Hayfield could see more students then expected, but the way I see it is if Silverbrook and LBSS get Option 3 NOW, Hayfield boundries will be set NOW and close to overcapacity, because after all this I don't see any chance that if a middle school is built, some of those kids are going back so again Hayfield is left holding the bag. So the choice is, do we take a chance of being overcrowed later, or do we accept that option 3 goes and we are overcrowded now.
Because Silverbrook is driving this is why I say set the Hayfield boundry now. Sure it is a Risk with BRAC that Hayfield could see more students then expected, but the way I see it is if Silverbrook and LBSS get Option 3 NOW, Hayfield boundries will be set NOW and close to overcapacity, because after all this I don't see any chance that if a middle school is built, some of those kids are going back so again Hayfield is left holding the bag. So the choice is, do we take a chance of being overcrowed later, or do we accept that option 3 goes and we are overcrowded now.
Please write to the entire SB, Jack Dale,Gary Chevallier as well as the Board of Supervisors. We all have a right to be upset and these people need to hear from all of us, not just the Crosspointe Crowd.
1:06,
I agree with you (I am not 12:46), but whatever boundaries that come out of this event will likely be set for Hayfield whether we like it or not and regardless of the future. This is true regardless of what promises are made. There is no way that any Lorton Station will return to SCSS once returns to Hayfield -- even if Hayfield is over 100%.
HF can and should take in @100-150 Middle school students and 350-450 High School students. The option # 2 boundaries do slightly more than that, but it could be done other ways as well. Option #3 overcrowds, and Option #1 overcrowds the middle School while leaving hayfield w/o the HS students it needs.
Hayfield should come up with their own boundary study, send it to Gary and fight for it (using words). Don't accept option 3 because it puts too may kids back at Hayfield and leaves no room for BRAC. 2A and 2B are much better for Hayfield, but you could make a strong case for even less children going back to Hayfield than those options offer. It is not Hayfield's fault that SCSS is overcrowded, it is the fault of every community that pushed so hard to go to SCSS, who were so determined to get in, they didn't think about the consequences. As far as I am concerned, SCSS can stay a little overcrowded. Plenty of other schools have had to do it for many years. Don't be forced into something just because it suits Silverbrook and LB. There are many of us out there who would like to see someone stand up for Hayfield.
2A/B minus the 80 families in Mason neck would work fine.
How bout the school board sell the middle school site and use the money to add a wing on SCSS or to the new Laural Hill ES for 7-8 grade. They really only need enough space for about 500 kids. The others overcrowding to SCSS would be redistricted to LBSS over a 5 year span and the areas of Gunston and Lorton Station would continue on at SCSS.
Laurel Hill ES does need to be built. There aren't enough empty seats in the surrounding elementary schools of the South County cachement area to absorb the OC of Silverbrook and Lorton Station.
I did not say don't build Laurel Hill, Just add a couple more halls and put in 7-8 graders in them and bingo problem solved. You could even make more room at Laurel hill if you send some of Silverbrook to Halley which as room and some to Sangster which has room and then send some of Lorton Station to Laurel Hill so that Lorton Station is not overcrowded.
Sounds good, but I don't think that land will create the $ to build the extra space needed. Also, it does not help HF get the HS kids it needs.
I don't think K-8 should be in the same building. Do you really think it's appropriate to have a bunch of hormonally-whacked pubescent preteens with kindergarteners???
Good points by both. How bout this. Sell the land should be enough to buy the books and other equipment, get some surplus military tents with tent stoves and build camps on the old prison grounds inside the walls. That should hold those wacky pubescent preteens!
Build the LHES, implement optin 2A or 2B and we are done!
3:55
why didn't I think of that. OK thats it done. good night.
2B or not 2B? That is the question.
2B IS DEFINITELY THE ANSWER!!!!
Now if only the entire school board was like 4:06!
K-8 will be fine if we leave the folks on the other side of I-95 at Lorton.
It appears that Shakespeare actually had some foreknowledge of our dilemma all those years ago. This issue is much bigger than I thought!
Lorton is on both sides of I-95. In fact all of Lorton should be at the Lorton School SCSS
4:28 comments prove this is not as much about overcrowding as it is about Silverbrook/NF/Halley setting up their own private schools using public money, while keeping out the east of I95 people. The school board should be ashamed they support such people. No more public/private partnerships!
Keep writing to your SB and tell the rest of your neighbors to also voice their opinions
11/13/2006 5:59 PM
How do you know that was a SB/NF/Halley. It may be the Laurel Hill community!
I have no confirmation but I do know that the Silverbrook residents have been a lot more political than NF, Halley or LS!
Laurel Hill? is Silverbrook for now! Is there something with the water west of 95 that makes them allergic to the decent folks on this side of the tracks?
There are decent people on both sides of I-95. I promise that we're not all like the loudmouths of our neighborhoods! I live in Barrington and would like my community to get redistricted to Lake Braddock.
Barrington will go to Lake Braddock. It may not be for a couple of years, but it will go.
I wish it could be next year. My oldest is already at LB for GT and the 2nd one in line is stuck going to SC next year unless the School Board does what's best for the South County area.
It is refreshing to hear from a Barrington Neighbor that doesn't think sending their kid to Lake Braddock would turn him into gang banger. Lake Braddock is a great school with good kids and would be a comfortable place for any kid to go to school, especially next year, the first year after the completion of its extensive renovation. Maybe all is need is a smaller split of Silverbrook to Lake Braddock in the next coulple years say Barrington and South run Oaks?
But then you'll hear whining about a disproportionate split feeder from the "small" group. Sending all the north-of-Silverbrook,west-of-Hooes group is a large enough student number that they would see eachother in classes etc.
Also sending just 2 neighborhoods won't solve the OC issue at SC.
I think there are a lot of Barrington/Silverbrook people who would like to go to Lake Braddock. The only way to make it happen is to be active, e-mail board members etc. and speak at the public hearings. 2B is by far the best option, followed by 2A followed by nothing else.
I think all the communities, whether you are from Hayfield ES, LSES, Halley ES, etc, should be writing their SB members etc in support of 2B. Submit a letter in the local papers (Laurel Hill Connection, Community Times, South County Chronicle)while you are at it.
Did you all here know that the Halley islands (williamsburg sq, Hagel cir. etc.) are going to be put back in HSS in all the options so far put forth. The hand outs are so hard to tell, so much so that I wonder if they were trying to hide the fact that Halley ES would now become a split feeder.
I for one did not know that.
From the Post 2003 when Lorton Station was coming on line. I feel for these families they should not have to go through this humiliation again!
New Lorton School Leaves Some Out
The Washington Post, March 16, 2003
By S. Mitra Kalita
Washington Post Staff Writer
In an after-school program off Route 1 in southern Fairfax County, children watch cartoons, shoot pool and begrudgingly do their homework. They fight over cue sticks and chocolate chip cookies and the remote control.
And for the last few weeks, everyone's been fighting about them.
These children live in the "old" Lorton, apartment buildings in the blue-collar community that grew up around the sprawling Lorton prison complex. In the nearly six years since the order was given to close the century-old prison by the end of 2001, rapid development has created a new Lorton -- and a debate about who should attend the elementary school that will open in September to serve it.
School-boundary adjustments, a fact of life in fast-growing communities, generally upset parents whose children will change schools and possibly face longer bus rides. But in this case, the parents least displaced by the new Lorton plan -- those whose children will stay put or move to schools even closer to home -- were its most vocal opponents.
So why the uproar?
Nobody, it seems, wants the kids from Route 1. More than half of them receive free or reduced lunch, which is the only indicator of socioeconomic status in school enrollment data. More than one-third are immigrants or the children of immigrants, learning English as a second language.
In the School Board's original plan, the children from three apartment and townhouse complexes along Route 1 -- the Terrace Townhomes of Gunston and the Highlands at Gunston, both on Hagel Circle, and Williamsburg Square -- would have attended the new Lorton Station Elementary School. Many parents protested, saying they doubted that the school could -- or should -- handle the needs of so many low-income and immigrant children.
"As a homeowner, I'd be concerned if a school that was part of my development was stigmatized as being for all the poor kids," said Gregory A. Schuckman, president of the Lorton Station Civic Association. "That would have a negative impact on our community."
Earlier this month, the board decided to cut the two Hagel Circle complexes out of the plan, creating an island of children who would remain at Halley Elementary, even though it is farther away than the new school. The Williamsburg Square children, fewer of whom participate in the lunch program, will go to Lorton Station.
That, in turn, has drawn protests from many parents at Halley, who say all the Route 1 children should go to school close to their homes and reduce the number of at-risk students at Halley.
"We are back to the '60s and busing -- busing certain groups of people to different schools to make the numbers look like the county wants them to look," said Denise Krein, who lives in the Crosspointe subdivision and has a son at Halley. "Busing didn't work in the '60s, and it doesn't work now."
Krein said the amended plan labels Halley -- one of 20 Project Excel schools in Fairfax County that receive extra money because they educate disproportionate numbers of at-risk students -- as a school for struggling pupils. "My children don't need the resources, so how are they benefiting from this decision?" she asked.
At the Lorton Community Action Center's after-school program, children were as fickle about where they want to go to school as they are about sneakers and video games. "I want to stay at Halley," said Gabrielle Mitchell, 10, who lives on Hagel Circle. Days later, her whim switched to: "I don't like that school."
She and her friends seemed unaware of the image their address has come to convey. It is clearer to her brother, Perrin, 15, and their neighbor, Emanuel Keene, who work in the program, helping the younger kids with their homework, serving them juice and cheese curls, switching off the lights to quiet them.
Keene, 16, attends Hayfield High School's Intervention and Support Program, which serves students with behavioral problems. His mother works a couple of blocks away at an assisted-living facility, and he pays 20 cents a day for his lunch. "A lot of people think Hagel Circle is bad," said Keene, who wants to be a football player, lawyer or doctor. "I'm not a bad kid, though."
Lorton's housing stock spans apartments such as the one he lives in, old farmhouses and, increasingly, rows of new, colonial-style homes. Lorton hovers between growing suburb and quaint rural town. A sign for a brand-new neighborhood called Crandall Run advertises housing prices that start in the $ 300,000 range. A few steps away, a sign in front of an older home advertises hub caps for sale.
If the Hagel Circle children had attended Lorton Station, more than one-third of the school's 642 incoming students would have been eligible for free or reduced-price lunches. Schuckman, of the Lorton Station civic group, said that would have set up the school -- and possibly the area -- for failure.
"This region is undergoing such dramatic change," said Schuckman, who moved from Alexandria to Springfield before settling in Lorton about three years ago. "You have upper-middle-income people moving into this area, and you also have the existence of lower income people ... There's a blending that needs to take place, and it's not without turbulence."
Strategically, both the Halley parents and the Lorton Station parents tried to recruit the Route 1 parents to their conflicting causes. Parents from Halley knocked on doors in Hagel Circle and stressed the area's proximity to Lorton Station, urging them to support the original boundaries.
Lorton Station parents plugged the stronger resources at Halley and urged support for amending the plan. In the end, they prevailed with the School Board.
The process has left the Route 1 parents feeling bruised. Alnita Coulter, a Route 1 mother of three, attended one meeting on the boundary changes and said the use of the word "transient" offended her.
Coulter, who bought her townhouse in Williamsburg Square 2 1/2 years ago, said her neighbors are labeled "transient in the fact that they are not homeowners...It's like they were saying, If you don't own your property, you are not entitled to a new school."
She said she and her daughters can only benefit from Lorton's growth and increasing affluence. "My concerns are a little different than someone who is an in-home parent," said Coulter, a technical writer for the Bureau of National Affairs.
"By the time we rush home and try to hold everything together, it may not always seem like education's our most important thing. "But we, too, believe in the American dream and our right to have that. It starts with an education and our right to have that -- not just any education but a good education."
As parents dissect and adjust to what happened last week, plans for a new high school in Lorton are being completed, awaiting only a county permit before construction begins. Already, they wonder who will go there.
-30-
Great research and bringing up old pain. This si a new world. Crosspointe is looking out for themselves only. They arent throwing anyone else out.
The SB will have to live with their decision. The scary part is they already know they will be out of a job in a year and who cares!
It is plain to see that by spliting Halley and sending the island areas in the Halley ES district to Hayfield that in two years time when Laurel Hill ES comes about the kids at Hagel Cir. will be redistricted out of Halley ES into either Lorton Station or Gunston ES. I wonder how that will go over in the coming boundary study in 2008.
Will the right thing for Lorton and the kids who need the most help be done? or will political pressure and influence win out in the end again.
Hagle Circle was not split from Halley nor SCSS. Just more misinformation on this blog.
11:42,
You are wrong Hagel circle, Williamsburg square is split from Halley in all three options and would be going to Hayfield, and that is straight from Gary, call him or email him yourself, I did and he confirmed that. The intention is to do away with the Islands when the Laurel Hills comes on line which means they will be redistricted to either Lorton Station or Gunston ES. That is a fact call and check for yourself. I did not think it was true either.
4:57 - You are right. I didn't notice it myself, but if you look at study 2A and 2B, there is a little cut-out in the portion of Lorton Station still going to SCSS. That is Hagel Circle going back to Hayfield. It is hard to see, but it is there. It is just terrible that Hagel Circle is being thrown out. I guess they are just the "wrong" type of people for SCSS. If option 3 goes ahead, the Silverbrookers get everything they want now, including getting rid of Hagel Circle. The school board is really trying to set up two sides of the tracks here, and will create a split feeder just to make the Silverbrookers happy. Why are they making decisions about LHES now, we have not even had that boundary study yet! In fact, it looks like they have already made the decision about the Hagel Circle going from Halley to Lorotn Station without any public hearings. Can they do that? If they vote in option 3, I will make it a point of voting against my SB member and any other political figure who gets involved in this, that I can vote for.
6:43 and everyone else,
Please email all school board members about your concerns about the various options. They are not hearing from nearly as many people who support Option 2A/2B as they hearing from Option 3 supporters.
I was an option 2A and 2B supporter, but now I think both options need to be modified to leave Hagel Circle at SCSS. Look at the maps for options 2A and 2B. No mention of portions of Halley (Hagel Circle), going to Hayfield, yet, other areas are listed at the top of the page. Read Option A, it says “Newington Forest to Lake Braddock, part of Lorton Station to Hayfield and Gunston to Hayfield. Where is any mention of part of Halley to Hayfield? Yet, if you look carefully on the map, Hagel Circle is colored green for Hayfield, the portion staying at SCSS are pink (using the on-line map). This is deceitful on the part of F&P. Are they trying to slip Hagel Circle back into Hayfield without anyone noticing? Are the Silverbrookers totally in control of this process? We all need to e-mail the school board, and Hayfield parents need to start speaking out!
I am surprised option 3 is getting support, I thought that even Silverbrook did not like that. As far as Williamsburg Sq. that townhouse neighborhood next to Hagel Cir. goes to Lorton Station and would go onto Hayfield with Hagel Circle. Williamsburg Sq. was not part of the Halley Island of Hagel Circle.
The instigators at Silverbroook like Option 3 because it
1. lets them stay at SCSS
2. kicks out all east of I95 students
2. Keeps SCSS grossly overcapacity so they can still cite a supposed need for a ms.
Oh your right, I was thinking Option 1 had no support from Silverbrook or anyone. Doesnt Option 3 put Hayfield dangerously close to becoming overcrowded? Why is Lake Braddock left out again in Option 3 when that school is losing population in the out years?
Because the Crosspointe Crowd manipulated the LB numbers whining about the renovation. The renovation is complete as of April. There will be surplus seats at Lake Braddock and they should be used by redistricted SCSS kids.
Some SC people like Option 1 because it only has SC kids going outside of SC for 2 ms years instead of 6 ss years. They also like it because it keeps the demographics and the core SC community together.
Apparently many people at both Hayfield and LB don't like Option 1 and say it is too disruptive. LB already does have a lot of kids who leave after 8th grade when they return to their base school from the GTC at LB.
Option #3 does put HF overcrowded. Option #2 puts HF close, but it can be done without trailers.
It makes sense for F&P to start thinking about the LHES school boundary when doing this boundary. It would be nice if they could draw the lines and reduce split feeders. However, Lorton Station is a BIG elementary school and even if they are reduced to capacity will not all fit into Hayfield and will have to remain a split feeder.
The option #1 solution might be ok for Silverbrook to Lake Braddock. They already do that with GT and LB has plenty of HS students.
HF needs HS students and does not have the proper space for option #1 to work very well. Option #2 works much better for HF (#3 just send too many kids). Would the numbers work if we did #2 for SC to HF and #1 for SB to LBSS?
8:33, I believe it would work but I think LBSS would not like it at all as it makes a close to capacity MS at LB over capacity.
The difference between option 2 and 3 for Hayfield is 154 students. If you take that difference and send only that many Middle schoolers to LBSS then that would hold the line on the numbers at SCSS noted in option 3. This is what has been called on this blog the "Compromise for All" plan or CA Plan. Phase 1 and 2 from option 3 would still be on the table.
Please tell me how FCPS spends $56 million on renovating LBSS-including it's core facility, and without adding any students is suddenly at capacity?
If this is true, there should be a voter revolt to get those mongrels out of office! ALL OF THEM= UP TO AND INCLUDING THE BOS.
154 students divided by 6 grades is about 25-26 kids per grade level. That is a really small amount to pull out of one elementary school when the rest of the grade would go elsewhere. I don't mind split feeders, but I do think they need to be as even as possible.
154 students divided by 6 grades is about 25-26 kids per grade level. That is a really small amount to pull out of one elementary school when the rest of the grade would go elsewhere. I don't mind split feeders, but I do think they need to be as even as possible.
Maybe they put extra thick walls in and took away capacity.
I was thinking 154 middle schoolers or two Grades, then they go back to SCSS. If no free middle school comes about they stay at LBSS all six years and in two years you would add others from SCSS to bring the school down in numbers.
Study 2B with Hagel Circle at SCSS is the best option. SCSS can handle the numbers because the core facilities are already in place. If any school can handle a few trailers, it is SCSS. It has a large cafeteria, library, a lot of music rooms and lots of bathrooms. I'm not worried about SCSS staying a little over capacity. LBSS renovation will be finished in April, lets use space. Study 2B modified!
11/15/2006 6:43 AM & 11/15/2006 7:20 AM
Hagel Circle will stay at SCSS. Good for them!!! WOW, I didn't know Hayfield was like that, making sure Hagel Circle will not end up at Hayfield!
Thank you 10/30/2006 10:25 AM for this link:
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
Hagel Circle will not be going to Hayfield in the options put forth. If they do they would be welcomed back, but those kids would lose the resources at Halley unless they also send the money Halley gets to the school they get redistricted to. As a Hayfield parent I for do not care who comes back as long as it is not too many to overcrowd the school. Frankly I think the kids at Hagel circle would be better served by Hayfield anyway as I have a feeling the communities in SCSS do not want them. Bring them home back to the Hawk nest fine, but bring the money to the school that is going to have to foot the bill for the resources they get now!
11/15/2006 10:04 AM
I'm sure you would welcome Hagel Circle back. But some people are not as nice as you, even at Hayfield! Please read that link above. Thanks!
Hagel Circle goes back to Hayfield in options 2A, 2B and 3. Look at the color maps on the county web site. Not one study (except option 1, HS students only) leaves them at Hayfield. Where are you people getting your information? What option leaves Hagel Circle at SCSS? Can't you see the little island cut-outs sending them to Hayfield, while the rest of the southern portion of Lorton Station elementary gets to stay at SCSS? What is that all about? Hagel Circle is being singled-out and once again made into an island.
The options put forth have the Halley attendance circles (including Hagel Circle) going to Halley for Elementary and Hayfield for 7-12. This has been confirmed with F&P.
Correction, only study 1 (HS Students only) leaves them at SCSS.
11/15/2006 10:15 AM
Hagel Circle will stay at SCSS, they go to Halley. Good for them!!!! Call the school board and find out. Wow, once again someone making sure they don't get stuck with Hagel Circle at Hayfield!
10:18 - Have you checked option 2A, 2B and 3? They all send Hagel Circle to Hayfield as an island, while the rest of the southern portion of Lorton which surrounds them stays at SCSS. The Hayfield people didn't plan that one! Why should Hagel Circle be an island to Hayfield? Once again, is the Silverbrookers making sure they don't get Hagel Circle.
11/15/2006 10:27 AM
Call the school board! They stay at SCSS. We know you don't want them at Halley. Read the link above about how Lorton Station kicked them out of the LSES!
1015, I called and checked and in #2 and #3 the circles go to Halley and then to Hayfield. The purpose is that they plan to have contiguous boundaries when the LHES study is complete.
I mean Hayfield!
The HF community will happily take kids from everywhere (including Hagel Circle). We have met and the feeling is unaminous. We simply do not want to be overcrowded again. Option #1 and #3 cause overcrowding at HF. Option #2 is ok for HF, but we recognize the problems it causes elsewhere. HF cannot fix this problem alone. Either SCSS must remain oc and/or LB must take some.
What is the Halley PTA's opinion on the island issue? Are they willing to fight to avoid being a split feeder? Are they willing to give up all day kindergarten and "excel" status? Can we hear from you?
What is the Lorton Station opinon on the islands?
If option 3 is implemented, how will there be contiguous boundaries for Hagel Circle? The southern portion of Lorton Station Elementary school will stay at SCSS. Hagel Circle, which is in this southern portion, will be sent to Hayfield as an island. If Hagel Circle is eventually sent to Lorton Station Elementary, it would be better to leave them at SCSS with the communities that surround them who will also attend Lorton Station Elementary/SCSS. Otherwise, Hagel Circle will be an island in the middle of a SCSS neighborhood. 10:36 - you need to call F&P. No matter how many times you say it, Hagel Circle is being sent to Hayfield in options 2A, 2A and 3. Please call F&P and get your facts straight.
The islands are planned for HF in options #2 and #3.
There should not be any islands when LHES is complete and we should avoid having them now (and we should avoid long skinny pennisulas)
Lorton Station will have to remain a split feeder when LHES is complete as there is not enough room at HF to take all of LS. HF should take as much of LS as they can without going over capacity.
So we can stop the islands now by keeping the southern portion of Lorton Station Elementary at SCSS, Hagel Circle at SCSS because it is in the southern portion of Lorton Station Elementary school district and will eventually go to that school, and send the northern portion of Lorton Station to Hayfield.
Sure -- draw a line through LS and some go to HSS and some go to SCSS. Just get the numbers right. It would be nice to have the LS community involved in drwing that line. Are you there Lorton? Where should the line be drawn?
Does it matter where Lorton Station wants the lines? Seems like everyone is trying to keep them out of SCSS so why bother. I think the line needs to be drawn on the west side of Silverbrook to LB.
1259,
To fix the SCSS overcrowding (without a Middle School) students need to be taken from Silverbrook and Lorton Station. It will take extra space in HF AND LB to solve the problem -- if it can be solved.
Lorton Station is at the crossroads of two boundaries. The opinion of those communities is important. If they want to return to HF it would helpful to know that when the line is finally drawn.
As far as the west side of Silverbrook, you are probably right on. That needs to happen if there is no new Middle School. They need to start phasing it in soon so that the impact will start to be realized.
The argument of "splitting Silverbrook" can be eliminated when they draw the new LHES boundaries because all of SB canget to go to LB.
11/15/2006 1:56 PM
Wow, Lake Braddock will really be overcrowed! 2b alone will put Lake Braddock at 97/98% the 07/08 school year. All of Silverbrook at Lake Braddock, think again. You really need to take a look at the school boundary before you start pushing kids out of SCSS. When LSES is built you will still have one side of Silverbrook RD going to SCSS. Unless you feel all of Silverbrook should go to Lake Braddock. Think again! Lake Braddock is pretty much at capacity now, and that is with the 4075 capacity!
LB is near capacity and should not take much right away. However, FCPS should start sending rising 7th graders to take advantage of the decreasing population in LB feeder schools.
After LHES is built and Silverbrook is at proper levels LB should be able to take all of them to avoid a split feeder. LB might need to jettison the GTC somewhere else to do that, but having all of SB go to the same School would be best for the community as a whole.
The circles should not be islands. Any neighborhood that can be within walking distance of the school should attend that school unless there are capcity issues and other walkers are closer. It is very creepy/predatory that Halley gets Project Excell and full day kindergarten. Let Halley people pay for full day via SACC. The school board should move these children to their new (for Fairfax County) neighborhood school. It is even more creepy if they are made a secondary school island. School board members shuld be impeached.
Lorton Station is way over capacity and cannot absorb the islands right now. The islands should go away when the LHES-Lorton-Silverbrook-Halley-Gunston study is complete and the project excel status of the schools should be reevaluated at that time as well. That is a fight for another day.
Halley should not be a split feeder during phase I or phase II of this study.
Lake Braddock needs more kids. Should they come from Silverbrook or Newington forest?
Forgive me, I am the nice Hayfielder that would welcome Hagel Cir. back. I put in that statement that Hagel Cir. would NOT be going to Hayfield when I meant they would be going to Hayfield. Sorry bout the confusion. I also don't think this is a fight that should be put off. If Hagel Cir. is going to be split fed and sent to Hayfield next year that only means that they will be redistricted into a Hayfield feeder during the boundry disscusion to come in 2008. That essentially means the Facilities office is making a policy change when it comes to the resources dedicated to this project excel school at Halley. It also means that they already have an idea of what the boundaries will be (or at least an option)for Lorton Station and Gunston in 2008. I suspect Gary is not doing this on his own that someone is driving this and it should be made known to the communities that are effected. I wonder if anyone at Hagel cir. even knows that in two years their kids will not be in a Halley ES island.
I wonder if anyone in Halley knows (or cares) that some of their kids may be going to Hayfield in less than a year.
The line drawn through the Lorton Station boundary to split HF and SC will undoubtedly drive the LHES boundary -- whereever it is.
To minimize the back and forth for these kids, we should error on the side of leaving more at SC rather than send them to HF and then back to SC in two years. If in two years it makes sense to send some more to HF, fine do that, But don't plan to "return to SC" as phase II suggests. That sounds good on paper, but does not work well in practice.
Hagel Circle has been included in the SCSS boundaries. Check the maps. If "Gary" made this statement you have to wonder if it is correct??? The Boundary maps show no split to Halley.
6:11
Your just plain wrong, look at the color maps on line. Gary made this statement in writing!
Just use the seats at LB and stop fiscal waste!
Hagel Circle is going to Hayfield in option 2A, 2B and 3. The problem is, I didn't realize it until today and I think a lot of other people didn't either. It did not show up well on copied handouts, it is clearer using the color maps on line, but no other mention was made of it. Shouldn't Gary have put Hagel Circle to Hayfield in writing in the handout? Other neighborhoods were mentioned, why not Hagel Circle. Were they tring to hide something?
Where are you able to see the color maps of 2A and 2B? I thought these had been taken down and replaced with Option 3. Is there an archive somewhere?
But if you zoom in on the Option 3 map you will see it clear as day.
Does anyone know how many students live in that Halley island?
So two years ago it was too traumatic for the South Hunt Valley kids to have to leave their Irving friends behind to attend Lee. What happens to these few sixth-graders from Halley, already a handful of underprivileged kids in a sea of wealth, who are split off from their friends and forced to enter seventh grade at a school where they don't know anyone?
Also, because Laurel Hill is still two years off but this plan goes into effect next year, Halley gets to keep its full-day kindergarten and extra Project Excel perks along with its few disadvantaged students. How convenient!
Then, when their economic status no longer adds value because they're now at the secondary level, these kids are bused off to Hayfield. But the plan is disguised to make it look as though all of Halley stays at South County.
This maneuver is simply stunning.
Go to FCPS web site, the boundry handouts in color are on line from the first and second meetings.
Dale should do an administrative boundary change and let them go to Lorton Station. He should move out portions of the Lorton Station GTC to Halley. Halley should then lose the Excell funding as well as full day K. A full day for kindergarten age students should be via inceased SACC.
Lorton Station has Young Scholars a program for children traditionally underrepresented in GT programs.
If you do what 8:46 suggests, Halley turns into another Silverbrook with very little diversity and miniscule socioeconomic demographics and LSES increases its FR/Luunch and ESOL indicators.
Lets do what 8:46 says and get the kids some brown shirted uniforms.
The Halley attendance circles going to Hayfield in option 2A, 2B, and 3 are the three east of I-95 - not just Hagel circle. The one west of I-95 stays at South County.
These kids will be welcome at Hayfield if one of these options happens, however it is not fair to them.
We cannot send more kids to Lorton Station because it is way over capacity. The elementary schools in the area will be that way until LHES is built. That is why Gary is pushing to have it built. That is when the islands can be eliminated and excel moved to Gunston or Lorton Station (or both). Until then all of the Halley kids should go to SCSS regardless of where they live.
The key phrase is "west of I-95". When did the interstate become the divisor between the right and wrong side of the tracks?
When LHES is built some kids on the east side of I-95 will have to got there as there to bring LS under capacity. However, I-95 does present a significant transportion barrier in that area. Why fight it? Which side is the better side? Who cares?
From a recent email:
From: Chevalier, Gary [mailto:Gary.Chevalier@fcps.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 11:55 AM
To: XXXXX
Subject: RE: SCSS Boundary Meeting Option 3 Demographics Data
Hagel Circle is not reassigned to Hayfield, it will stay in SCSS under options 2A, 2B, and 3.
not according to the maps from the handouts.
11/15/2006 10:34 PM
I'm glad you posted that! Again Hayfield is making sure Hagel Circle will not end up at that school!!!
No. Hayfield has been open about how they don't care who comes over. It's the Silverbrook/Barrington group who doesn't want the "undesirables".
Stop accusing people and communities of statements never made and sentiments never thought. Such statements were only made by small minded people like yourself. Stick to the subject, how can capacity issues be resolved at SCSS with as minimal harm as possible to the students and communities?
If you say "communities" than plans 2A and/or 2B or best for ALL communities to feel the pain of this boundary issue.
Go Fish....
Why does anyone have to feel pain? It is good for Hayfield to receive more High School students and it will be good for those kids to avoid an overcrowded South County. All are winners in the SC to HF move as long as we don't overcrowd HF.
Lake Braddock will be in the same situation as HF in a few years. Why wait? Let's not send too many, but go ahead and start sending rising 7th graders so they can be Bruins from the start.
I think that there will still be a need for a Middle School when it comes around in 2015 even with Silverbrook going to Lake Braddock so that effort should continue.
I agree with 8:51. Plus when the Middle school is built, all of the CURRENT communities can rejoin SCMS and SCHS. Let's just hope that some people don't forget about that part. I believe it needs to be signed in blood and NOT disappearing ink.
new school board new ink
8:51 here. I think that when the MS is built the communities that go to Hayfield and LB should get to stay unless HF or LB is overcrowded again. Those families have been bounced from HF to SC, back to HF, and should not be sent back to SC. Move them and leave them alone.
Not when BRAC and new housing on Belvoir is on its way. The MS will give the "South County" communities space.
When the students from Silverbrook get moved to LB they can stay there also.
11/15/2006 10:34 PM
It appears that Gary may have sent out different answers to different people. I have seen an email with him stating just the opposite. Maybe some clarification is in order ...
Question for anyone to answer.
For all intents and purpose, LBSS is at capacity now. Can anyone dispute that in years to come, more room will be available and should be used by current SC students?
If not used by SC then who would utilize this space or is it LB communities wish to not utilize the coming space ever?
If the numbers show a decline, than LB should be used by moving Silverbrook over. Split them up also.
Who has used the space at Mt. Vernron, Falls Church, South Lakes and others? Why the importance now at LBSS? Who will use such space??? Look at all the schools around LBSS. Robinson has a modular to help educate over 4000 students. Since when have modulars become permanent structures? Why did FCPS make that school so big? Woodson and others are over capacity. Some of these students reside closer to LBSS than those who live in Newington or even for that matter areas of Silverbrook and Halley. Adjust Hayfield and build a MS. Done with this blog.
Since Woodson is not part of this study now, send Silverbrook to LBSS.
8:17
The small minded people are the one who are only thinking that Hayfield needs to be used. The BIGGER picture needs to include LBSS.
9:46
This is what we get when we limit the study to only three areas. Maybe in "phase II" the new School board can include MV, WSHS, Lee, etc. Take this down to the feeder school level. Won't that be fun. :)
Mt Vernon is surrounded by UC schools. Why send kids from one UC school to another? This is the dame situation for Falls Church HS.
South Lakes is undergoing a boundary study next year along with Westfield, Centreville and other nearby OC schools.
The Woodson Island in Fairfax Station is in the middle of the Robinson boundaries. Robinson is more OC that Woodson in both numbers and percentages of students.
Option 2B is the only fiscally responsible solution.
2B is close, but SCSS is still overcrowded. Also, the drive to Mason neck to HF is a proven bad idea so moving those families makes little sense. 2B, but a little more of Silverbrook needs to go to LB. Actually, once SB is below capacity (after LHES) the entire school should go to LBSS.
I agree to some extent with 1030. ALL of Silverbrook should be going to LB starting with the next year's 7th and 9th grades.
Why the importance now at LBSS?
9:46
SCSS is packed beyond the limit that is the importance now. They either use Lake Braddock are overcrowd Hayfield again after a decade of overcrowding
Between the two schools SCSS could get down to numbers that are reasonable.
Again I ask the folks advocating bringing Mount Vernon in this. How is that school going to relieve SCSS it doesn't border SC and is even further then any distance now proposed for current SC students from any location North or South.
Answer this. If I make the assumption that no middle school is going to be built any time soon what would the solution be to relieve crowding at SCSS?
SCSS was built as a HS with minor modifications to handle 7th and 8th grades for short term. The area will need a MS due to growth. It is not unlike those areas in Centreville and Chantilly that had tremendous growth in a short period of time.
#s at LBSS are projections, there is an unknown. Other area schools also show projections of being OC. No community should be redistricted to a school based on projections of future empty seats. Mount Vernon can be used more effectively and there is room at the MS feeder, enough for at least 100 - 110 students.
Hayfield has room. Option 3 calls for 300 students next year. Not bad with a gradual increase over time. The school can handle it. It is a good school although after reading this blog some are now wondering???
There are emoty seats at Lake Braddock as of this April. This is not a projection, this is fact.
I find it very telling how 1:15 wants to push people from Hayfield to MV so that more kids from the eastern part of SC can be pushed into Hayfield. All of this because your neighborhood is afraid of Lake Braddock.
The #s are all projections. And LBSS's #s are going down. Send the students from Silverbrook over there to fill the seats.
1:15
Ok the area will need a MS, and it is on the CIP for 2015 I believe. In the meantime what do we do? Sure Hayfield will gets kids back as they should and that will help. What about the rest. I suppose we should not do any planning what so ever in anything we do as that would be based on expert projections. Projections are not perfect but you can't just sit around and react as things happen, that just makes things worse for everyone and we are talking about the future of our kids. Why should your kids at LBSS be sitting next to an empty desk while Kids at SCSS are practically sitting in the hallways.
Oh and 100 MS kids you want to send to Walt Whitman. Where would those come from? I guess we could send the Hagel Cir. kids there, who cares they won't know until it is to late.
Your right Hayfield is a good school, we try teach our kids to be responsible and find solutions to problems unlike your solution of hiding your head in the sand, ignoring the facts, and hoping someone else shoulders your responsibility.
http://connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=74015&paper=72&cat=104
Fairfax Station PR machine at it again!
Lake Braddock is not ignoring the facts, the fact is they are at 94% capacity with the new renovation(4070 seats)!! How come it's so bad for Hayfield to be at 95% and its o.k. for Lake Braddock. Go back and look at the handouts, when you use 2a or b Lake Braddock will be at 98%. That number doesn't include BRAC, new homes being built off of Fairfax County PKY or anything else!! Oh, everyone want 2b because it has nothing to do with facts they just want to get back at the Silverbrook community!!
Noone is talking about LB capacity today. Do you deny the FACT that if no change to the boundry would leave LBSS at 80% capacity in five years? Homes are being built in the Hayfield district as well, and we are smack in the middle of the EPG and Belvior so don't talk to me about BRAC unknowns it effects Hayfield just as much if not more.
Noone here wants to get back at Silverbrook. Send Newington forest makes no difference to me. Hell send Newington Forest to Hayfield and leave the rest of the Boundry for SCSS the same. Would that make you happy. I just don't want Hayfield to go back to be an overcrowded school again.
Oh and also with option 2a/b LBSS would be at 92-93 percent in the outyears. Why can't you get past next year. This is about the long term, don't be so short sighted.
The projection for 2007/2008 school year in option 2b is 97/98%. Gary C. has not supplied data for the projection from 2008 to 2012. Even with the 2011/2012 for option 2b puts Lake Braddock at 93/94%. Hayfield uses the argument 95% is too high for them! It looks to me 93/94% is pretty close. The last boundary study, the boards projections for Lake Braddock were off for this school year 06/07, they were lower! These are projections, not actual empty seats. The Hayfield community or who ever, wants to get back at the Silverbrook community for what ever reason!
Oh OK so now you finally admit that the option 2 puts Lake Braddock at 93-94 percent which is close to the 95 percent for Hayfield in option 3. Why not compromise, you like option 3 which puts you at 81% and Hayfield at 95% a difference of 14%. So take option 3 numbers down 7% and LB up 7% leaving both at 88% capacity in the out years. That leaves 2804 at SCSS or 112% almost one and a half percent less crowded then the option 3. Hell add another 2 percent at Hayfield and LBSS you get SCSS down to 108 percent. But you don't want to help with the overcrowding at SCSS. It is you that has something against Silverbrook because it is the Silverbrook kids left at an overcrowded SCSS that suffer while your would benefit from an under utilized renovated school.
By the way I am not talking about moving 500 kids next year to LBSS, it needs to be phased in over the next 5 years to keep LBSS from getting all at once. However, Hayfield has room now and can relieve SCSS faster by taking more up front. I just don't want to see too much.
I'm not from Hayfield. My kids are in Silverbrook and SC and I really want them to go to LB. I think the longer bus ride is a no-brainer when you are talking about a school with a proven track record for selective college admissions. I believe that Silverbrook should be redistricted to Lake Braddock.
For all you Hayfielders, we in the Silverbrook area are not all as paranoid as 3:21.
We know my Silverbrook friend. This is a stress on all involved it just seem some are not reasonable when the facts are hitting them over their head. I don't want any school to be overcrowded, but I don't want to see anyone area be taken advantage of just because we may not have the same political connections or the same organized effort in getting what one wants. I just want the fair and right thing done here then I would be happy.
Despite some of the talk, I think you would find that we at Hayfield miss most of our former Hawk families, not all but most. hehehe.
Take care.
I think I can guess which ones your weren't sad to see leave! Now if only they would move right next to SC so the Silverbrookers who can see the big picture can promote 2A publically without fear of being ostracized.
You should forget about LBSS and come back home to the Hawk nest. It is new and improved and a great place for your hatchlings.
If you don't trust Chevalier's numbers on Lake Braddock go to statistical reports and add up actual enrolled kids per grade level at elementary schools. Do an excell spreadsheet and project numbers. Then check new constructon projects for by right and rezoning. This won't give you an idea for resale but it will show what exists now.
Option # 2A/2B boundaries (grades 7-8-9) with the option #3 two year delay for NF/SB to LBSS is a reasonable compromise. This avoids the overcrowding at HF that #1 and #3 cause and delays the movment of SB/NF until the population at LBSS comes down (or not), the GTC is moved, or a Middle School is on the horizon.
Since all of the options so far (except the stupid #1) leave SCSS over capacity the little more that this causes in the short term is acceptable.
Mason Neck should probably stay at SCSS so HF could take a little more of Lorton Station.
SCSS is way over capacity, LBSS is at capacity, so it makes sense to make HF over capacity as well! Two wrongs = right.
There shouldn't be a delay for the Silverbrook to Lake Braddock redistricting. It needs to be implemented this year.
All of this will be revisited when the Laurel Hill ES, Lorton Station ES, Halley, Silverbrook, Gunston study is done.
Let's leave/make some room to deal with that pending issue. It is not possible to get everyone down to the 90-93% level that makes sense, so it is important that we leave at least one at that level.
11/16/2006 6:24 PM
You are right! But maybe the part of Lorton Station from 95 interstate up to Hayfield. Let the 95 be the cut off and the other's from L.S. stay at S.C. Put Mason Neck at S.C. and delay the move of NF/SB. Done! I like it!
2B, 2B, 2B.....
7:23, 6:24
You are on track here, what we need is numbers for these areas to determine where the line would go. I suspect if you take the option 3 boundry for Hayfield, take out the West of 95 area and put that area back to SCSS as well as Mason Neck then Hayfield would be in the range of 90-93 percent. Do it for 7-8-9 grades for the quickest impact. If the numbers warrant, I would add back the area South of Lorton Rd. to SCSS for the simple reason that I believe this area will be redistricted to a SCSS feeder in 2008. In 2008 when the new Laurel Hill school comes to be, the area north of Lorton Station going to Gunston should be redistricted to Lorton Station. The area South of Lorton Rd. now in Lorton Station should be redistricted to Gunston ES. Then by 2008 all of the new Lorton station area would feed Hayfield, and all of the Gunston area (Mason neck and south of Lorton Rd.) would feed SCSS. The areas West of 95 now in Lorton Station would be redistricted to Halley or the new Laurel Hill. This does a couple things, it eliminates islands and split feeders, and it gives a better movement against traffic for the ES at Gunston and Lorton Station. I have no idea where the numbers would fall but it seems logical to me. What do you think?
Y'all are still forgetting about using LB. If Newington Forest is sent in its entirety to LB instead of Silverbrook, it actually removes lowers the overcapacity even more than the 2B option. It also doesn't make a new split feeder.
836
I agree with you, but the question is can LB handle more next year without over crowding? Could it be phased in? or maybe you go with option 3 part for LB and see what happens.
It would be great if LS could cease to be a split feeder, but it is too big. It is currently over 1000 and even if it gets down to the design size of 750 it will produce too many kids for HF.
Both 2A and 2B involve phase-ins.
As detailed by Gary,
07-08, 7th and 9th grades
08-09,7th, 8th, 9th, 10th grades
09-10, 7th-11th grades
10-11 and beyond, 7th-12th grades.
That is where I would like to see the numbers. Reread my comment at 747. The 2008 version of Lorton Station would be the area North of Lorton Rd., East of I95 and the area currently going to Gunston (and currently feeding Hayfield) North of the current Lorton Station Boundry. So Lorton Station would lose the area South of Lorton Rd. and West of I95 in its current boundry. Just a guess but that may just bring Lorton Station down and possible Gunston as well. Then again it may not.
9:10
ok,what if they did the option 3 boundry (less Gunston and Lorton Valley) but only middle schoolers from option 2a?
So is 9:19 suggesting the following?
07-08, 7th and 8th grades
08-09,7th, 8th, 9th grades
09-10, 7th-10th grades
10-11 7th-11th grades
11-12 and beyond, 7th-12th grades
That would redistrict the same number of kids out of SC but does burden the middle school side of LBSS.
No
I was suggesting
07-08-7th grade
08-09 and beyond 7th and 8th grades
return to SCSS for 9th-12th or stay at LBSS if no Middle school appears.
9:16 Why are you cutting up Lorton Station to Hayfield. You're forgetting that since BRAC is coming Hayfield's numbers will go up greatly. Therefore, work on the issues of sending Silverbrook over to LBSS where the numbers or going down.
2A or 2B must be implemented as originally planned. LB has the space. LB won't be affected by BRAC the way Hayfield and Mt Vernon will be.
Look we all know kids are coming back to Hayfield, I trying to figure a way of not having to many kids coming back. What happens to LBSS is an issue they want to delay but will still have to deal with it at sometime. Thats fine with me if SCSS wants to stay overcrowded while they delay then so be it. I just don't want to see them put Hayfield at a high number.
2A, mason neck at sc(maybe then they could go to LHES later!) 95 use as the cut off, LS split to SC
Post a Comment