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 1201 – 1400 of 2729 Newer› Newest»10:15
You are also the parents of kids who cheat and change grades in the school's computer system but get off because of the money you have. Your also the community that buys his own youth league and demands that his kid plays where he says to play.
Give me a kid willing to work for "pocket change" and I will show you a kid that respects what hard work means and respects our fellow men. Attitudes like yours creates class envy. Instead of thumbing your nose at those that have less then you, why don't you try help others achieve as you apparently have instead of turning your back. You may find it would make for a better community and you a better citizen.
Question
Do demographics matter in these boundary decisions?
If Silverbrook is as snobbish as most of you seem to think, why aren't we all clamoring to go to Lake Braddock with the superrich of Roseland, and the 5-acre propertes off of Hampton and Henderson.
We are happy to see Mason Neck go back to Hayfeld. If we are so money-conscious, we wouldn't be willing to let another monied, 5-acre community leave.
You don't know Mason Neck do you?
Mason Neck is mostly multi-acre minimum zoning property. The residents of that area bribed their way into SC via the lat-minute amendment. What's not to know?
Mason Neck is not the reason for the overcrowding. They didn't bribe anyone. SC parents were just mad because they were included at the last minute. Those 80 kids don't make any difference in the overcrowding. They deserve to be at SCSS. They are at the most southern point of the county.
So according to Madon Neck, who should be kicked out of SC?
It's still 80 more kids in an overcrowded school. Rt. 1 roadwork (widening) is now complete and the trip to Hayfield is not so bad. It was a mistake calling the school South County. There are plenty of southern neighborhoods that don't go, like Saratoga. They are also west of I95, yet drive down the parkway every morning to go to an east of I95 school. Geographically, they have a right to go SCSS. There is a portion of Lorton Station that goes to Hayfield. They have a right go to SCSS too. However, there are just too many kids in the neighborhoods near SCSS for everyone to go. It is just numbers. I like both options 2A and 2B, because those options take kids from both sides of SCSS, use empty seats at LBSS and HSS and leave room for BRAC. Those options also give us time to see if a new middle school is really needed.
10:37
How about the community of Barrington?
The trip to Lake Braddock is not so bad either, in fact a large portion of Fairfax Station further away then Barrington, and South Run Oaks makes that trip now! I think a compromise is in order. Portions of Silverbrook and more of Lorton Station should have to leave SCSS and go to LBSS and HSS while leaving Mason Neck in SCSS. The trip for such a few kids is half of what it was going to Hayfield and surely would not impact SCSS severly. Besides a new middle school is coming anyway right?
I think the schools with the highest demograpic numbers should be the least crowded. Can these schools not do a better job of dealing with the needs of these students when more individual attention is given? I assume this is why Halley ES has a 17:1 ratio as a project excel school.
8:18 - lower numbers mean less teachers. The ratios are factored for diversity anyway. If numbers go too low, programs are lost and that hurts the kids. ESOL classes are separate to regular classes anyway, so more or less kids in a school overall, does not help. Mason Neck should go back to Hayfield because they were not supposed to go to SCSS under study 4, which was recommended in the first SCSS boundary study. They got in at the last minute when the SB thought there was enough room to squeeze them in. We all know now the numbers were faulty. Lorton Station is so close to SCSS, they should have priority over Mason Neck. Mason Neck to Hayfield would close the Gunston split-feeder, and give Hayfield another more "up-market" neighborhood.
9:18
Gunston wanted to be a split feeder. Lorton Station has way many more students than the Mason NEck kids. If SC parents had not insisted on a junior class the numbers would still be high but the overcrowding would not have esculated like it did. By the way, what is an up market neighborhood?
To all SC parents look what I pulled from the FCPS Website. Will you be participating?
To Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) will join schools across the country to recognize the sixth annual National Inclusive Schools Week, December 4-8. The week highlights the nation’s progress in providing a quality education to a diverse student population, particularly to students with disabilities.
National Inclusive Schools Week is designed to highlight schools that provide a supportive and quality education to a diverse student population, to ensure that schools continue to serve all their students, and to acknowledge the work and commitment of teachers, administrators, students, and families that help to make schools more inclusive
9:28 - The exclusion of a junior class would have only helped numbers for one year. It would not have helped anything long term. You claim that Mason Neck is only 80 kids, but that means there are 80 Lorton Station kids, who live very close to SCSS who have to go to Hayfield so your 80 can go to SCSS. It is all about numbers, and 80 kids take 80 seats. I would consider a more "up-market" neighborhood as one with a fairly high average household income. Since FCPS does not pay for school team sports, uniforms etc. each school having their fair share of such neighborhoods is important.
Lorton Station ES is also too crowded. I don't understand how they got the boundaries that they did but that school needs to lose population. It would make sense now to redraw the elementary boundaries now then close up the split feeders and the attendance islands. Look at a map, you could redraw Gunston, Lorton Station and Halley ES boundaries then eliminate the split feeders by sending all of Gunston to SCSS and all of Lorton Station to HSS.
By the way, I am not sure that Gunston wanted to be a split-feeder. Mason Neck wanted Gunston to be a split-feeder so they could go to SCSS.
The portion of Gunston that goes to Hayfield wanted to continue to go to Hayfield and are happy. This I know for a fact.
9:47
Is the reason that Hayfield's sports teams are so small is that families can't afford for their kids to play because we don't have enough up market neighborhoods? What is going to happen to your area when all those interest free loans come due?
The question was not whether Gunston wanted to stay at Hayfield or go to South County, it was whether they wanted to be a split-feeder.
From attending the boundary meetings and listening to the public hearings two years ago, they did want to be a split-feeder.
Hayfield's sports teams small? This is news to me. Last year Hayfield had a very large and impressive track team. They seemed to have a lot of kids on their football teams too. Don't know where "small" is coming from.
9:54 - Please tell me where I can get an interest-free loan?
Interest-free loans, where can I get one?
Ok Ok you all know 9:54 meant interest only loans. It brings up a good question, I wonder how many folks will be hurting in the next couple years when these loans ballon out of control. You may see less booster money coming in to buy those green uniforms.
2/3 of Gunston ES is from the portion that goes to Hayfield. They are kind of naturally split anyway from the Neck. I see nothing wrong with Mason Neck wanting to go to a SCSS which eliminates about half the time on a bus. For the area going to Hayfield now from Gunston, it is probably just as easy to get to Hayfield then it is to get to SCSS
Perhaps South County needs some more "up-market" neighborhoods.
Well the up market neighborhoods may be childless soon, so that wouldn't hurt South County population. You may be right 10:30
This boundary study has gotten out of control; the School Board should make a decision and stick to it, no last minute add-ons! This is what should happen: Lorton Station should go to Hayfield, Mason Neck should go to Mount Vernon – they won’t overcrowd the middle school. Option 2A or 2B, ok 2B. Grandfather all current South County school kids, because they have been at that school and YES they do get along with each other!!! This will allow Lake Braddock and Hayfield to ease into the new student population. But the school board doesn’t have the BALLS to do this! O.k., bloggers let me have it!!
One more thing,
The bus ride for all these communities are fine, remember when our parents had to WALK 10 miles to school, today kids ride the bus, they are o.k.!
Lorton Station is too big to fit at Hayfield. Leave some at SCSS. Mount Vernon does not have any room in the middle school. Try again. What is wrong with sticking to 2B and leave it at that?
Didn't our parents walk up hill with no shoes or holes in their shoes.
Gunston is a small school with core capacity of 450. I believe it is still on a septic system and therefore should not exceed capacity. It should also be affected by the building of Laurel hill ES. Statistical enrollment figure for the state reporting listed it at 617 for sept 2006. Since the Mason Neck portion of Gunston definitively has no where else to go any elementary boundary adjustments should come from the non-SC portion. Once Gunston is at or below capacity, 100% of it should go to South County.
10:53 - I agree, let's stick with 2B, even though I am ok with 2A. Mason Neck will fit at Mt. Vernon, because their middle school has 50 empty seats, and Mason Neck is only 80 kids total. However, Mt. Vernon is not in this study, Hayfield is much closer for Mason Neck than Mt. Vernon, and Mt. Vernon needs BRAC space. I think Gary did a good job coming up with 2A and 2B, but then things got political.
You know Hayfield needs Brac space as well, that is why option 3 is just to much going to Hayfield. But then again option 3 is the political appeasement option which pleases only those that squak the loadest while dumping on Hayfield. I wonder if anyone thinks that Mason Neck would be welcomed back if a Middle school gets built early. My guess is a resounding NO!
11:53 - I am 11:31, and I agree with you. Hayfield needs BRAC space and option 3 is just terrible. 2A and 2B leave Hayfield around 90% capacity, which is much better. In my opinion, Mason Neck would be better off at Hayfield, at least they are welcome. I wouldn't want to send my child to a school where they were not welcome, and I think that is the case with South County. But that is my personal opinion, and I know Mason Neck thinks differently.
I agree with you 11:31
Too bad we are out numbered, I just do not see options 2ab happening due to the School Boards willingness to keep certain neighborhoods happy. I only hope that what ever they do they keep in mind that Hayfield students should not be forgotten and this school should not become overcrowded after years of dealing with trailers and packed halls.
12:47 - The way to beat the School Board is to have a huge presence at the public hearings. If Hayfield has a lot of speakers, all saying that Hayfield should be left around 90% capacity to allow for BRAC, the School Board will have to listen. It is easy for them to turn their backs on one or two people, but when the numbers are there, they can't. Get Hayfield students to speak and give testimony about how Hayfield is such a great school now that the overcrowding issue has been resolved. That is how Mason Neck got into SCSS. They had a lot of speakers at the public hearings and didn't give up. Even if 2A and 2B do not go ahead and option 3 is recommended to the School Board, you can still fight for Hayfield to stay at 90% capacity, and you will win if you have the speakers.
East of Pohick Creek goes to Hayfield. West of Pohick Creek goes to SCSS. Done. If no middle school then someone goes to LBSS.
11/28/2006 11:16 AM
What do you mean by "pupil placement guideline restrictions"?
Hayfield should get enough Lorton Station ES or Newington forest ES kids to bring the Middle School and the High School to the 80-85% capacity range.
Mason Neck should stay at SCSS as the split at Gunston is "natural", it is better for those kids, and the numbers have little impact on the situation.
No one attending Halley ES should go to Hayfield. The island issue can and should be fixed when they do the LHES boundaries. At that point you can increase capacity at HSS again.
It is not urgent to relieve overcrowding at SCSS - that is a myth. It is important to increase HSS somewhat.
Move some of SB to Sangster! that will help SB, SCSS and LBSS.
If it is not urgent to relieve overcrowding at SCSS, why are we having a boundary study? I thought SCSS was so overcrowded they needed a staggered schedule this year, and next year will be worse.
Because we like boundary studies.
Lake Braddock empty seats should be used to address overcapacity issues at SC. Hayfield should not be the entire solution. 2A is better because it reduces the OC issue at SC the most of all.
3:30
SCSS is overcrowded and it will be worse next year, but not enough to make taking action urgent. Hayfield was in the same situation for 15+ years and it did not require urgent action. Something should be done, but ... it is not urgent.
We are having a boundary study because there is overcrowding and to determine a course of action. that action we take is not urgent.
4:08
Be careful no to drink the "overcapacity" koolaide. There is not as much space available at LB and HF as the F&P make it out to be. To be at 100% requires creative scheduling of classrooms and teachers to push their stuff around on carts. The rooms are fully utilized @ 90% capacity.
As in fill developments continue to be built in the HF boundary it makes sense to leve them @ 80-85%. They should take on some more of LS or NF, but none of them want to return. :(
Well if 80 to 85% should be the cut off, Lake Braddock is way over that now and will be later too! The school board shouldn't even think about moving kids to Lake Braddock!
^^^Says the Fairfax Station poster.
The feeder schools have progressively smaller totals of each grade than the current numbers at LB. There is lots of space at Lake Braddock for ALL of Silverbrook, even more than just the area suggested in 2B.
7:14,
Hey, maybe the school board could move ALL the kids from South County to Lake Braddock. That would fix the OC at SC, and keep Hayfield at 70%!!!!!
No need for that. 2B works just fine.
Now that the renovations are done at LBSS they can take it lots more kids. They could go to 110% and be just fine. The GTC takes too much space and might need to move, but otherwise it should be able to take most if not all of SB or NF.
Even 2A can easily fit with the GT Center staying at LB. I vote for Newington Forest to go to Lake Braddock instead of splitting Silverbrook.
Why should Lake Braddock stay at 80-85% capacity? West Springfield, Lee, Edison, Woodson, Robinson and others, are 100% capacity and above. Lake Braddock is a public school, not a private country club. Use the space.
Robinson , Centrville, Chantilly, as well as many other schools never had any core capcity bumps yet they got capacity boosts with modulars. Isn't South County getting an auxiliary gym plus the basketball bubble plus another indoor field house in the area? This is ridiculous
Go back and read 11/29/2006 6:34 PM post. Hayfield & Lake Braddock should both be at 95% or higher. No need for Hayfield to stay at 80-85%!
If you put Hayfield at 95% capacity next year you might as well bring back the trailers because Hayfield would be overcapacity within five years. That would be a crime against Hayfield, a school that suffered years of overcrowding. If no middle school is going to be built earlier then planned then SCSS will have to remained overcrowded until it is built. Noone cared Hayfield was at 125-130 percent capacity for years, why is it that now that SCSS is crowded everyone is running around like the sky is falling.
It's the same neighborhoods who caused the OC at Hayfield that are causing it at South COunty. Tell the School Board, F&P etc that Lake Braddock excess seats MUST be used in the SC/OC solution.
Go Option 2A!
7:07 - I would like to hear more about the auxiliary gym, basketball bubble and indoor field at SCSS. When will they be built? Who is paying for them? If we are having an expensive boundary study to solve overcrowding, why are we expanding core facilites at the school? If the boundary study solves overcrowding, will the additions still be built? Why so much for one school?
People are concerned about fiscal waste ought to be complaining about this. Why does a brand-new state of the art school need an upgrade? There are schools on the CIP list that desperately need to be renovated.
Use the empty seats at H and LB for the SC overcapacity. Fix the schools on the CIP. SC needs to wait their turn.
The county might put another indoor field house at Laurel Hill. This would not be a donation or proffer so it does impact everyone financilally. The problem is that South Run is actually between near Lake Braddock and the fine folks of western Silverbrook. FX county is the only county I know of that would put 2 of these indoor sites near each other. So yes South County is getting a real boost.
Here is a link to the auxiliary gym listed on bids received for FCPS projects. I gather this is their basketball bubble:
http://www.fcps.edu/fts/adminservices/resultsdandc.pdf
"Meeting: 11/14/2006 Regular Meeting No. 8
Category: 5. Consent Agenda
Agenda Type: Action (Consent)
Agenda Item Content
Staff Contact: Dean A. Tistadt, Chief Operating Officer, Facilities and Transportation Services
SUBJECT: Award of Contract
RECOMMENDATION:
That the School Board award the contract for the new auxiliary multi-sport structure at South County Secondary School to Creative Finishes, Inc., in the amount of $550,000, and authorize the Division Superintendent, or his designee, to execute the contract on behalf of the School Board.
EXPLANATION:
Bids for this project were received on October 23, 2006. Due to the rigid construction schedule and increased construction costs, this project exceeded our original construction budget. Therefore, after aggressive value engineering and scope reductions, we recommend award of this contract as listed below. Funding for this project will be provided from various proffers and the 1999 and 2001 bond referendums. This contractor has performed satisfactorily on previous contracts with the School Board."
Start complaining via letters to the editors of the Connection nd Community Times and South County Chronicle. All taxpayers need to know about this.
Who reads those newspapers? I don't even know where to get them or how to find them...
The School Board directed this study to return options that allowed a 10% buffer. None of the options do that. F&P should be sent back to the drawing board. F&P should present a boundary change that would put all five schools at 90% @2011.
If this is not possible, then they need to go back to the SB and say so. At least do it at LB and HF Middle and High Schools and leave SCSS overcrowded.
They are thrown on the driveways in my HOA on a weekly (Times and Connection) basis. The Chronicle is sporadic.
www.connectionnewspapers.com
www.chroniclenewspapers.com/southcounty
www.timescommunity.com
F&P did come up with a plan that lowered all 3 schools to mid-90% capacity, Option 1. Despite the question of the disruption psychologically of all middle schoolers to LB and H, Gary is still pushing it behind the scenes.
Option #1 does not put the schools at 90% as directed. Worse, it puts the Middle Schools at HF and LB in excess of 140% and leaves the High Schools way undercapacity.
It is also bad for education, costs significantly more in transportation, is harmful to the building of High School programs (currently struggling to adjust to the change two years ago) at LB and HF, and is not supported by the principals or the communites.
I DO NOT accept that Option #1 makes all schools undercapacity. That is a MYTH perpeuated by those unwilling to accept that Hayfield Secondary School is TWO SCHOOLS. It is not just bad, it fails to meet the criteria the board set out.
3:25 Do you think that Gary will offer #1 to the SB as the reccomended option? I think that he will do a modified #3 putting as much as fast as he can to Hayfield and then leave the rest of the problem for his replacement.
I think he's going to pursue one of the 2 Option 2s, whichever was the one that sent the fewer number of kids to LB.
I don't know how anyone can know what he is going to recommend.
And then the SB can always ignore what he recommends or add their own amendments to the recommendation.
Good point! As we all know, that's what happened 2 years ago. If Lorton Station GT hadn't been redistricted to feed from Twain to LB, Silverbrook would have even shakier aarguents. Interesting how they want LB for GT but not for the "regular" kids.
from 11/30/2006 12:23 PM
Chevalier is going to do whatever politicians tell him to do. Option 3 was generated by politicians not FCPS staff. That it even exists is an abomination and corruption of fiscal responsibility. If they had not done the public private partnership, most likely there would be boundary process meetings now for the opening of the school. LB, WS, Hayfield, Lee, MV, edison - all plus their midle school boundaries should have been addressed since there are some real oddities in this county. Whitman is in the Sandburg attendance area, is smaller, yet feeds a larger HS than W Potomac. The Whitman capcity is a deterrent to increasing MV students.
What ever happened with Tisdadt's bus depot?
IMHO FCPS needs a few sites spread around this county for transportation servicing. Woodson , TJ and others have gas stations for FCPS vehicles and Woodson houses DIT-Dept of Information Technology service guys that actually do things at schools.
http://www.arlingtonconnection.com/article.asp?archive=true&article=54211&paper=80&cat=104
http://www.potomacalmanac.com/article.asp?archive=true&article=55296&paper=80&cat=110
Does anyone have kids who have more than 24 students in an English class in grades 6-12? Va SOQ caps them at 24.
The SOQ is what FCPS says it exceeds. It is known by school board members who choose to let this happen and divert resources to pet projects, etc.
Here are the schools that will be the most likely forgotten by FCPS to placate SC for it's new middle and elementary school. http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?archive=true&article=63841&paper=65&cat=112
This article is about hot water availability in schools. 4 high schools are on the worst condition list on the CIP and 7 middle schools so here are the top 4 for each:
high schools
1. Woodson- under renovation while overcapacity by 222- frost over by 150 with minor gtc boundary changes.
2. Edison
3. Marshall
4. Thomas Jefferson-vocal group so now it even has a task force
Middle Schools
1. Longfellow
2. Sandburg
3. Cooper
4. Thoreau.
Option 3 really means they have decided to build a new middle school. How else can they justify leaving SCSS at 113%? How do they justify leaving Lake Braddock way under capacity? This is clearly not Gary's work. I will make a point of going to vote against any politician who supports option 3 and the building of a new middle school while there is space at nearby schools.
Somebody should be contacting the PTSAs of the schools mentioned in the CIP. They should be aware that their scheduled renovations may be delayed. Woodson had their renovation delayed FOR FOUR YEARS due to the SCSS construction. FCPS was just lucky that one of the many ceiling tiles that fell randomly from the Woodson ceilings didn't hit someone. Otherwise there would have been gross negligence and major lawsuits.
Tell ALL of the SB members to support Option 2A.
The following article specifically mentions traffic issues. This is precisely why Lake Braddock needs to be used to help alleviate overcrowding at South County!
Fort Belvoir Traffic Issues Lead Army to Move Museum
By Alec MacGillis
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 1, 2006; Page B01
The Army said yesterday that it will build a national museum at Fort Belvoir instead of on a nearby site that local officials warned would worsen the congestion expected with the military's planned relocation of thousands of employees to the area.
The reversal came under pressure from Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) and Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), who share local officials' concerns that Belvoir's expansion could create a traffic disaster.
Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
Fairfax Focus
Full List of Blogs (1 links) »
Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web
Save & Share Article What's This?
DiggGoogle
del.icio.usYahoo!
RedditFacebook
"We've got transportation chaos looming over the horizon here if we're not careful, and the Army museum situation was just going to exacerbate it," Moran said. "What the Army wanted to do was create a destination point on I-95 contiguous to one of the worst traffic congestion points in the Washington area."
The Army had been planning to build the National Museum of the Army a few miles northwest of Belvoir at the Engineer Proving Ground, a mostly vacant 800-acre parcel along Interstate 95 just south of the Springfield interchange. Army officials said the site had the space needed for its plan to let developers build an 80-acre hotel and entertainment complex around the museum, which would have helped pay for the museum.
But Fairfax County officials opposed the site, calling it the worst feature of the plan for Belvoir's expansion. They said they were already concerned about the Army's use of the proving ground to house most of the 22,000 employees being relocated to Belvoir under the military's base realignment program instead of putting more on the 8,000-acre main post.
Adding the museum and its estimated one million annual visitors to the mix would have caused a traffic nightmare along I-95 and routes into the proving ground, Fairfax officials said. They also noted that they had hoped to build a park on the half of the proving ground slated for the museum and that putting the museum on the grounds of the main post would put it much closer to other tourist sites near Richmond Highway (Route 1), including Mount Vernon, Gunston Hall and Woodlawn.
The Army held firm for months, even hosting a session for dozens of developers interested in building a hotel, conference center, restaurants and shops around the museum at the proving ground. But yesterday, the Army said it will build the museum on the north half of the main post, at the Kingman Road entrance off Fairfax County Parkway.
"We are persuaded that the Kingman site better supports the region's traffic needs and the desires of our community neighbors," Keith E. Eastin, assistant secretary of the Army for installations and environment, said in a statement.
Fairfax Board of Supervisors Chairman Gerald E. Connolly (D) applauded the shift. "The community appreciates that the Army is listening to us," he said.
The reversal came after Moran and Warner, expressing disapproval of the Army's plans to lease out land around the museum on the proving ground for the hotel and conference center, threatened to pass legislation preventing the development. Moran said yesterday that because the museum is supposed to be paid for with private funding, it was inappropriate to pay for it partly by leasing out public land to developers. Fairfax Supervisor T. Dana Kauffman (D-Lee) also argued that focusing private development on Army property undermined revitalization of the area around Belvoir.
Now that the Army has agreed to the move, Moran said he is not fully opposed to revisiting the possibility of leasing land around the museum's new site for development to help pay for it. What matters most, he said, is that any funds from the Army's leasing of Belvoir land should, for now, go toward road improvements needed for the expansion.
Eastin said the Army is no longer planning to lease out land to pay for the $300 million museum, which is scheduled to open in 2013. This leaves the question of how the museum will be funded. Private fundraising has not been going as well as museum boosters had hoped, according to those familiar with the project.
"We're going to have to look at the financing in the days to come and look at what's feasible and what are the best options," Army spokesman Paul Boyce said.
Fairfax officials said that the Kingman location is not as ideal as Pence Gate, which they had long favored. One of the main entrances to the post off Route 1, it would have put the museum even closer to the other historic sites. The Army plans to build a hospital at that gate and said putting a museum there would overload that entrance.
Local officials said that despite moving the museum to the main post, much remains to be done to prevent traffic problems as workers relocate over the next five years. The Army has estimated that road improvements will cost $600 million, but it is unclear how much the federal government will cover. Fairfax officials also want the Army to put some of the transferred employees at a warehouse site adjacent to the Franconia-Springfield Metro and commuter rail station.
"We're still dealing with adding twice the population of Falls Church onto half the land mass -- with no funded road improvements," Kauffman said.
As much as I feel for the schools on the CIP I also know that Hayfield remained overcrowded for almost two decades and would still be if SCSS was not built.
So let's make sure that the SB takes the fiscally and socially responsible route by voting for Option 2A! HF and LB stay UC, NF and Silverbrook aren't split, SC is closer to capacity.
2A or 2B is ok, but the Mason Neck area should stay at SCSS. some of the LS area that is going to HF should stay at SCSS as well.
Then say that. Just make sure you communicate your views. Okay, I'm done nagging,
Mason Neck should not stay at South County, they should go to Hayfield or Mount Vernon!
How about getting some of those duck boats to pick the Mason Neck kids off their docks, then sail over to the Mount Vernon area, jump onto land and deliver the kids to Mount Vernon High School? Almost no traffic, and those kids would be the envy of their peers!
Yea, arriving in a duck boat is almost as impressive as driving from Barrington to Lake Braddock in a fifty thousand dollar Beamer.
Here's a link to FX planning commission map:
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/dpz/comprehensiveplan/maps/localroads.pdf
FX could plot school locations via it's GIS and it also could enter census data which appears on another map. SC holds 2500 kids and that averages out to 416 max per grade level. After Laurel Hill it is safe to assume Gunston will be at 450 and lose kids from it's Northern sector. It is too small a school to be a split feeder permanently. Halley would remain at SC [unless they bus them around it or boat them across the Occuquan]. That leaves SC 1637= halley 648 + gunston 386 + laurel hill 604. Remainder is 863 to be divided up between whatever is left at Lorton Station, Newington, and Silverbrook after LH ES boundary chnages. That 863 is about 144 per grade level. If a 92% buffer is done it would be geographic from this latter group reducing the intake to 110. There is no way far western Silverbrook [Burke Lake Planning District] and parts of Newington Forest would remain at SC without the middle school. The only way the middle school would be built now or in the near future is by political machinations and back-room bartering votes for other areas such as not using capacity at South Lakes or Falls Church HS's.
7:51
I think that the Middle School is almost a done deal. You can call it "back room dealing" or it is just citizens working together with developers and political leaders to do what they think is best for the community. That is a matter of perspective.
There are inflential community leaders in all of the affected areas. The vocal and most obvious ones are from Silverbrook, but there are those working just as hard (and effectively) from Lorton Station and Mason Neck. This study has divided them somewhat, but they are still working the Middle School hard.
The more kids and areas they/we can keep at SCSS in grades 7-12 the more likely we can get a Middle School.
Au contraire,the middle school is not a done deal by any means. The rest of the county is aware of the fallout of what happened the last time a public/private partnership happened (corruption, bribery, fiscal waste, delayed renovations of other FCPS schools). They too are writing to the SB as Fairfax County taxpayers. F&P and the School Board knows this boundary study is under intense scrutiny from various watchdog organizations all over FFXCO.
If there is a proposal to build a middle school without first using the empty seats at Hayfield and Lake Braddock, heads will roll.
12/02/2006 7:51 AM,
I don't understand how Mason Neck would stay at SCSS? Would Mason Neck go to LHES when it is built? They are too far for the ES, you would have to put Lorton Station & other area's into Laurel Hill, not Mason Neck. I feel Lorton Station should stay at SCSS before Mason Neck. They belong with Gunston ES, which feeds into Hayfield. Too many kids are at South County now, Hayfield has empty seats, Mason Neck should be the 1st ones out of South County and stay out!
12/02/2006 7:51 AM,
I don't understand how Mason Neck would stay at SCSS? Would Mason Neck go to LHES when it is built? They are too far for the ES, you would have to put Lorton Station & other area's into Laurel Hill, not Mason Neck. I feel Lorton Station should stay at SCSS before Mason Neck. They belong with Gunston ES, which feeds into Hayfield. Too many kids are at South County now, Hayfield has empty seats, Mason Neck should be the 1st ones out of South County and stay out!
Mason Neck is by far the southernmost part of the county. That are is an obvious choice to stay at SC.
Reminder, Hayfield AND Lake Braddock have empty seats.
from 12/02/2006 7:51 AM
Mason Neck exists - get over it. What do you want to do with it? Donate it as an island to MD, DC , or PW county? The Laurel Hill site is on the Lorton Station side of SCSS near the intersection of Halley and the SB barbell. IMHO after Laurel Hill is built Mason Neck would still go to Gunston since it would have to drive past it to go anywhere else.
The people who are an obvious choice to be redistricted out of SC into LB are from north portions of Silverbrook. There will be no love lost when they leave.
Mason Neck has about 8-12 kids per year leave Gunston and go to SCSS. Those numbers have little/no effect on the overcrowding. Where they go to MS and HS makes no difference so they should go where they want to go. It saves those kids 5 hours/week on the bus going to SCSS over HF.
Dont worry about the split. They go to the same ES, but are from different community from those that go to HF.
Does it really make sense to take the "South" our of Sout County?
Mason Neck is key to getting a MS. If the SB families really want a MS they need to keep MN in the picture.
9:05 am
Heads may roll? Maybe after it is built, but ... it will be built. I suspect the ground will break within 15-24 months.
When the Middle School is built will anyone on the east side of I-95 go to it?
Facilities said that it takes 3-4 years for a school to be built from the day the ground is broken. If the first shovel is dug 15-24 months from now as per 9:35's guess, the earliest an MS will be finished is 4.5-6 years.
A temporary solution to deal with the SC overcrowding must be found. This is why Option 1 is the best. At the most, it will only be 6 years of middle schoolers at Hayfield and Lake Braddock.
12/03/2006 10:48 AM is incorrect.
Leaving the students in trailers at SCSS is FAR BETTER than option #1. The space is not available at LB or HF for #1. There is no need to have Middle Students drive a longer distance to go to another overcrowded situation, in a school they don't want to be at, ARE NOT WANTED, and do not fit in physically or socially. The board established criteria for this study and #1 fails to meet it.
Even with a Middle School there needs to be some movement of boundaries to send High School students to Hayfield and Lake Braddock.
I agree with 11:22. The School Board should still implement the smaller 2B Option of this study whether or not there is going to be a ms built before the CIP date. All the empty land near the prison is truly in the center of the SCSS cachement area. It would make sense to move the peripheral northeast and northwest communities to Hayfield and Lake Braddock so that SC can accomodate the students who live closest to SC.
I agree that it would be good for Hayfield to take on some more students, but the students attending Lorton Station are so close and connected to SCSS it would be a shame (and a sham) to move them. It would be better to move more students from the northern portion of Silverbrook ES area or NF to LB to relieve the overcrowding and let more of Lorton Station attend SCSS in mass.
Hayfield should take some students from Lee or Edison and leave Lorton Station alone! SCSS is a Lorton school and Lorton Station and Lortion should go there. LS provides a much needed balance of minorities and lower income students to SCSS -- that would be an imbalance at HF.
12:12 I agree, but I would leave Mason Neck at SCSS. The numbers are small enough to be of little significance and it saves them an hour/day on the bus.
12:33, That's why I said NORTHeast and west. Mason Neck is the southernmost part of Fairfax Station.
My main concern is that Lake Braddock will be ignored as a valid part of the solution and that both SC and Hayfield will suffer.
Let's not move anybody out of SCSS, all the schools are so close! It would be a shame for the kids to have a long bus ride to Lake Braddock or Hayfield. Mason Neck is not in Fairfax Station, they are Lorton.
Mason Neck is the most southern point of Fairfax County, not of Fairfax Station.
Students do have to move out of SC because the school is simply too crowded. Even if a middle school IS built, that will bring along new housing development as well. This will make the once lightly populated area heavily congested. Hayfield anad Lake Braddock are undercapacity. Use the empty seats via Option 2B or 2A (SB members can take their pick).
2B or 2A, but leave Mason Neck. Those numbers are more even and are closer to achieving the School Board mandated buffer. Need to consider moving more of the Silverbrook ES however.
Leave Mason Neck at SCSS, not going to happen!
Wanna make a bet? Silverbrook and Mason Neck are probably in collusion. Get rid of the more diverse families by embracing 2A.
2A will put Mason Neck at Hayfield, which is good for both! I don't see how Mason Neck could stay at SCSS and not Lorton Station. It is not fair!
Again, it's more logical for the most southern neigborhoods of SCSS to be attending the most southern hs in the county.
Same with the west side of the current SC boundaries. Newington Forest is further east than Silverbrook. The logic continues to have Newington Forest remain at SC while the west side of Silverbrook gets redistricted to Lake Braddock
To Lee: South Hunt Valley and Newington Forest. From Silverbrook to LB: South Oaks Run, Barrington and parts of Timber Ridge. To Hayfield: portion of current Gunston attendance area [might go to Lorton Station after ES boundary adjustments], Saratoga.
SC: 100% of Halley, Laurel Hill [will include portions of eastern barbell plus some Lorton Station and maybe some Newington Forest], Gunston [should remove Hayfield portion and get some kids from Lorton Station since it's capcity is only 450 and it's on septic]. Silverbrook and Lorton Station will be split feeders. Hayfield gets the Cluster 5 middle school GTC. Since kids are moved in groups and there are no small splits they can forego grandfathering. If GTC's are all done in house it would seem that efficient bussing and no grandfathering might enable this area to get better start times since the co-located ms and hs's increase efficiency in transportation.
This boundary study is supposed to relieve overcrowding at South County next year and into the future. It would be just plain wrong not to utilize the projected future open space at Lake Braddock. Lake Braddock it the only school fo the three projected to have declining population. That school may not have room now but they will. It not utilized now, another boundary study will be needed. How many times do we have to do this. Fix the problem now and move on to more important things!
We will certainly do this again in a few years when the Laurel hills ES boundary is fought over. The boundary made in the Lorton Station area made now will have a significant impact on where that boundary line can be drawn.
I think that it would be better to create that boundary now -- a couple of years out. Do we have time to do that? If not, then whatever the numbers for SCSS and HF now, they will change again.
7:21 -- ?? Lorton Station is much closer to Hayfield then Mason Neck.
I would keep Middle School GTCs out of Secondary Schools unless all of the students stay and go to High School there.
I heard that Lorton Station has significantly more discipline problems (and bigger) than other Elementary schools. Is that true or just a rumor? Should that affect the boundary process?
So where would Lake Braddock's GTC go? The GTC ms'ers come from SC, LB, Robinson, Irving. Irving is the only stand-alone middle school. According to CIP, they don't have room for a Center.
LB could still be a GTC but it would be smaller. Anyone whose base HS is Cluster 5 would go to the Hayfield GTC. Hayfield Lorton Station GTC are bussed past Hayfield area to Twain. That only has 98 kids in it's GTC so people are opting out of attending, FCPS has done a poor job on identification, or some combination thereof.
Others are bussed to Lake Braddock. Here's another very real question. Does FCPS need all middle school GT Centers? Many large and small elementary schools are now doing the rpogram in-house. Does FCPS need to allocate additional busses for what now has become 10% of the grade level population? Only where they have been loath to do base school boundary changes therefore can't fit them in their own school. Almost 50% of the schools have them. At secondary schools kids can with proper scheduling take advanced math at the HS with kids in grade 9.
That's a good question. My oldest 2 went to separate ms/hs before we moved to the SC area. Even at stand-alone middle schools, the advanced math issue is addressed.
8th graders ready for Geometry either take it at the middle school when there are enough 8th graders to have an entire class. This is obviously the best way but it's dependent on the number of kids qualified for the class.
If there aren't enough Geometry 8th graders they take it at the feeder hs first period and then get bussed over to the middle school after math. This can be a problem when the hs and ms don't run on the same kind of weekly schedule.
However, people must remember that the GTC curriculum is more than just advanced mathematics classes.
A previous post advocated GT Centers be in no secondary schools. There are any posts in here discussing how detrimental Option 1 would be to Hayfield. Why would having a GT Center in Hayfield be beneficial to the Hayfield community considering the other 2 statements?
Hayfield would not really benefit from having a MS GTC, however the FCPS would benefit because it would be a way to use the space/free other space without moving boundaries.
Some possible benfits would be
1) Don't have to go to Mark Twain for Middle School and return to HF for HS.
2) Avoid being a target for future studies as the "space" would be utilized.
However, I do not think that GTC should be at Secondary Schools unless all of the kids that do not go to TJHSST stay for High School.
I have a question, What was Newington Forest's High School before South County was built? Was it Lee? Are they a split feeder now? Thanks!
Newington Forest was split between Hayfield and Lee, with more students attending Hayfield than Lee. They are not split now. The entire Newington Forest elementary school district attends SCSS.
I like the idea of GT at Hayfield, but keep GT at Lake Braddock too. The Lorton Station GT kids could then go to Hayfield for middle school GT.
You cannot put a MS GTC at Hayfield and also relieve pressure off if SCSS overcrowding. Furthermore, Hayfield is looking for more HS students to help maintain programs such as AP. We are off track with the GTC discussion.
heck, I suspect that when the South county Middle School is built they will have a GTC there anyway.
12/04/2006 12:11 PM,
Thanks for the info!
GT at South County is a bad idea. That school does not need anything else to add to overcrowding. A GTC at Hayfield is a good idea, since Cluster V does not have a GTC and Hayfield has the room. LB and Twain are not Cluster V schools. If the school board is going to build a new middle school at South County anyway, I would support no change for SCSS, they can stay in trailers until the new school is built. GT and BRAC would bring enough kids to Hayfield.
Option 2A is the way to go. Send the east of I-95 kids to Hayfield with the exception of Mason Neck. Send all of Newington Forest to Lake Braddock. Everyone else stays at SC.
1:52 - Sounds like you want to move the more diverse neighborhoods out of SCSS. I support 2A or 2B "as is". If the SB insist on building a middle school, then I support no change.
shoot send most of Silverbrook to Lake Braddock and put all of Gunston and Lorton Station at SCSS
I think there needs to be a temporary solution WHILE the school is being built. If y'all don't want Option 1, then go for 2A and get SC numbers under control.
A good temporary solution is to use trailers. It worked at Hayfield for over 15 years. It works all over the county now. Why the urgency at SCSS now? Please don't tell me "we have to use excess space". 1) no we don't and 2) there isn't enough space at Hayfield 3) there isn't any space at LB for some time to come (if ever). We can make some changes on the edges, but not enough to get SCSS to the righ tsize.
We need to be careful and ensure that the FRL students are spread as evenly as possible. These students are less likely to be able to participate in sports and less likely to have involved parents. They are more likely to have discipline and educational problems. It does not mean that they are "bad kids" it just means they are more likely to have increased needs. It is tempting to just look at capacity only and not consider the implications of ignoring demographics.
If 2B is implemented, it doesn't overcrowd Hayfield or Lake Braddock.
2B overcrowds both Hayfield and Lake Braddock. In fact, none of the options presented so far meet the School Board's capacity criteria. 2B and 2A get close for HF and LB, but still send too many too fast.
2A and 2B keep LB and H under 100% and SC slightly over 100%. Option 1 puts all 3 schools under 100% but overcrowds the s portions of H and LB. Option 3 keeps SC vastly overcrowded, sends too many kids back to H too rapidly AND doesn't use the excess capacity at LB.
2B is the winner.
The School Board's direction was to put the schools at 90%. NONE of the options meet that criteria.
2A is the better choice, 12/04/2006 2:37 PM had some good points the FRL students need to be spread as evenly as possible. 2A will do that, Lake Braddock's FRL will be higher if you use 2A. 2B will make it much lower. SC will stay about the same. So you need to think about the demographics for Lake Braddock!
Actually Option2B decreases FR Lunch and ESOL at SC than does Option 2A.
Option 2B evens out SC and LB demographics more than 2A.
2B also puts fewer kids into Lake Braddock than does 2A.
While I like 2A/2B, I think that F&P will offer a delay on the SB/NF move to LB (as in Option #3).
1)LBSS and the SB communities have made very convincing arguments (even if under false premises) that the space is not and will not be available.
2)The SB community is VERY vocal and VERY well organized to voice their opinions. It is easier for F&P to put this off then to deal with it.
3)The School Board elections are in November 07 and delaying means there does not have to be a vote prior to the election.
4) Moving someone to Hayfield shows they "took action". They can take credit for that and blame the other guys for the failure to finish.
Maybe we could have "project excel" for Middle and High School ...
In answer to 3:46,
1)They haven't proven anything. F&P showed numbers. Silverbrook just spouts rhetoric and uncertainty. Each of the upcoming K-6 classes from the schools that feed into LB are smaller than the year previous. This means that this year's 5th graders are fewer than this year 6th graders which are fewer than this year's 7th graders etc.
2) People are "onto" the machinations of the Silverbrook leadership ad what exactly they did for the "public/private partnership". The School Board members don't want to get their hands dirty by aligning themselves only with the Crosspointe Crowd.
3) If the SB members have any hope of getting re-elected, they will do what is right for Hayfield, SC, and LB. The entire county is watching and taking note.
4) All this shows is that money talks and the people with less income get pushed out to make another Langley-type school.
Better another Langley HS than another Annandale or Falls Church HS!
4:04 I hope you are right, but I think that option #3 shows that F&P and the SB may be buying the "no space in LBSS" argument. With the LBSS principal publicly saying "no room" it has credibility regardless of the facts.
I thought Langley was a great school? Why wouldn't we want more of them?
4:22 - Since you are so interested in making Hayfield and Lake Braddock another Langley, I suppose you will also support boundary changes to make it possible. Yes, lets make Hayfield and Lake Braddock the next Langley!
The difference between the Langley HS boundary and the SCSS boundary is that Langley does not have a lower economic population within its current boundary. The attempt by the folks in Fairfax Station to throw Lorton out of South County is nothing short of telling these residents to sit in the back of the bus!
And the weak school board says it is ok!!!
Who all has written to the papers yet? Did you get published?
I think we need to be screaming bloody murder at the fact that Option 3 was even presented. It's racist and classist.
5:09-
No, its not.
5:09,
Please define: racist and classist. None of the option are racist or classist. The options are liked and disliked by many, and that's it!
No one really likes Option #1. The other options all have those that like them and dislike them.
4:04-
I'm looking for facts or evidence in any of your statements and can't find any. Can you back any up or is this just "rhetoric and uncertainty" combined with veiled threats to school board members?
to 12/04/2006 7:05 PM
Langley is getting an addition so I guess Strauss and Gibson will vote for the SC middle school. People in the western boundaries of Langley must be sweating bricks about the South Lakes boundary change next year. Both projects are not necessary yet the school board memebers will be cutting deals and swapping votes.
7:05
Regarding the 4:04 blog, I don't think pledging support or opposition to the incumbent school board members would be considered a veiled threat. It sounds like normal politics to me.
I have a question. Does changing the fuses in a string of lights ever make them work?
Yes, but why bother. Just get a new string of lights.
My guess is that FCPS will build this middle school ASAP and bump projects. This particular board has well established itself as a major builder of capacity when it culd do boundary changes. Read these meeting minutes carefully and you can see how far they have gone from what should be their mission:
http://www.fcps.k12.va.us/schlbd/minutes/20060126R.pdf
Gibson was the only board member who voted against the new Glasgow having a core capcity and classroom space for 1500 students.
The rest of the county is going to be so happy when their school's renovations get bumped to build a new middle school in Lorton, that is not needed.
Perhaps they should delay this whole boundary study a few years and evaluate BRAC in the meantime. SCSS has the core facilities already in place to handle the numbers with trailers.
Glasgow actually had more of a case regarding capacity than does South County. The SC overcapacity issues do NOT need to be met by buiding a middle school OR by renting/leasing trailers.
Use the space at Hayfield and Braddock. Implement Option 2A!
There is a Middle School on the CIP for a reason and that is a well established need. The question of when to build it and where the boundaries are is what is in question.
We can delay the build somewhat with a boundary shift, but all three schools will be beyond 90 % immediately and likely beyond 100% within 7-8 years. To delay action on building a Middle School in Lorton is akin to burying your head in the sand.
I don't think it would ever be needed not now and not in 2015. The student population countywide is going down and has been for the last 5 years. Lake Braddock is projected to continue to go down over the next 5 years. If you do this boundary change now and utilize space at Hayfield and Lake Braddock, in 10- 15 years the county will be completely built out and the need for another middle school will be nil. 10 years from now if the South County area gets to capacity then shift more over toward Lake Braddock or Hayfield and even better Mount Vernon. There is space, the only reason to clamor for a middle school is for the convenience of those in Fairfax Station not because the schools are full.
I predict the Middle school will be built then in the future all the schools in this area will be sitting at 75 to 80 percent capacity. Brac is not bringing that many students and if it does it will be Hayfield that is hit the worse not Lake Braddock.
75-80 % would be just fine. Let's do it.
Agree to 5:53 and my kids will never see that middle school.
Capacity should allow teachers to have their own classroom instead of an invented program capacity number using trailers and multi teacher classrooms. Just because 4500 kids fit in a school in the mid 80's doesn't mean we have to back there. The future of education is smaller schools, not larger. And sfatey dictate we get our schools down tot he real capcity number---the one the gym, bathrooms, and cafeteria were architected for...
Tremendous savings can be achieved in the operations budget to offset any capital costs that might be realized
ALL of Silverbrook and Newington Forest together would not bring LB population to 4500 students.
Go Option 2B!
5:53 - If you want 75-80% capacity, pay for it yourself. My county taxes have gone up about 85% over the past 5 years, and I am not interested in paying more taxes while there is empty space at nearby schools. If you want a new middle school, you pay for it, operating costs too.
^^^Finally, someone who is fiscally responsible!
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fairfaxfocus/2006/12/notes_from_school_boundary_mee.html#comments
Notes From School Boundary Meetings Are Online
From today's Metro section:
The Fairfax County public school system held a series of town meetings this fall as part of a boundary-study process for South County Secondary School; the gifted-and-talented programs at Frost, Kilmer and Jackson middle schools; and the gifted-and-talented programs at Haycock and Churchill Road elementary schools. Information from the meetings was posted yesterday on the school system's home page, http://www.fcps.k12.va.us.
I guess the Post is disappointed that we have found another forum.
ok, 75-80% may be a little low, but it depends on who is doing the math, and who you put in the numerator, and how you calculate the denominator. The "capacity" numbers that F&P uses assume all classrooms will have kids all day and all classrooms are full with kids. Do to that you would have to have the exact number of kids in the exact grades taking exactly the right courses. This level of perfection is not realistic and nobody expects it to be. That is why the School Board directed the schools to be at "90% Capacity" -- which really means "full capacity" in real terms.
7:43 The county will always vote to approve money for schools.
We should stop this thread and move to the new one. :)
7:21 - Are we going to see 90% maximum capacity for ALL Fairfax county schools? How about Woodson, West Springfield, Lee, Edison and many others, or are we just talking about South County and Lake Braddock? Who pays for it? Do you realize just how much of the County budget goes to schools, and now you people want every teacher to have their own classroom, and capacity somewhere between 75-90%. Not with my money!
90% capacity for all FCPS schools is ludicrous. Chevalier admits that core capcity varies widely and some with a legitimate core for 725 based on programs have modulars and have been bumped in the CIP to showing more than 1000. At large schools, new and renovated, 90% results in severely underutilized space. The critical problem with the SC boundary process si taht all 3 involved schools have adequate cores for listed capacity.
12/06/2006 8:08 AM
I think they mean Hayfield has NO more room. I thought they were at 71% right now! I guess Hayfield and Lake Braddock have no room!
10:25 - Nobody has ever said that Hayfield has no room. All of the options presented so far send many children to Hayfield, and Hayfield parents have said many times that they want numbers increased with a balance of high and middle school students. If the school board would stick to options 2A and 2B, the problems would be solved. Now there is Option 3. It sends too many students to Hayfield due to BRAC. It leaves Lake Braddock under capacity, and leaves SCSS over capacity which then leads to a new middle school. It is not right to ask the taxpayer to fund a new middle school with so many empty seats available at nearby schools. Now we have people claiming that 90% is really maximum capacity and that we should set up more schools as low as 70%. This is just silly. The school board needs to take a good look at all the empty space at schools like Hayfield, Lake Braddock, Mt. Vernon and West Potomac. It needs to fill those schools first. It needs to take into consideration the huge Fairfax County tax increases we have all had to face in recent years and show us, the taxpayer, some respect.
The School Board mandated that 90% is full capacity and they are correct. 90% allows for maximum efficient us of space. It is a reasonable goal and should be the standard OR we need to relook how we compute the capacity.
90% DOES NOT MEAN THAT 10% IS EMPTY! At 90% ALL resources are used all of the time. When a High School or Middle School (it is different for Elementary they can go up easier) goes above 90% they must start using creative scheduling and other INEFFICEINT uses of time and space to educate students.
If you don't believe, go spend a day in a High school and eat in the cafeteria.
12:02 - Are we going to do a county-wide boundary change to make sure all schools are at 90%? Did the school board mandate this for all schools? When? I would like a web address so I can read it for myself.
BTW, I volunteer at my child's school each week, that school is well over 100% capacity. I already spend a day each week in a high school, and everything at that school runs extremely well.
1) If you are really at 100% then you have too many students and you are not running as effeciently as you could. I suspect that your school is able to compensate with hiring good people who work extra hard and you have parents such as yourself willing and able to pick up the slack.
OR
2) You THINK you are at 100% but F&P has you calculated at something much lower.
OR
3) F&P needs to relook what your capacity how they calculated it and perhaps you have more capacity than is credited.
OR
you could accept that 100% capacity is ok, stop wasting taxpayer money, and implement 2A or 2B.
ok, 2A or 2B is fine, I haven't wasted $ yet, and 100% capacity is fine ... as long as we define 100% capacity properly. :)
What school are you at anyway?
I think you were going to send me a web address showing where the school board defined 90% and being capacity, so I read it for myself.
The SB should go with the 2A/2B option for Hayfield, and wait on the Lake Braddock move. When Lake Braddock's capacity starts to go down, then the SB can move students from South County to Lake Braddock. This way Haifild is at a capacity they can live with and Hayfield's boundary study is over. They wont have to go thru this mess again! It will be up to Lake Braddock to slove the problem!
LB's population has already gone down and is continuing to do so. It can very easily handle the 7th and 9th grades from Option 2B and somewhat easily for the 2A numbers.
If the kids aren't redistricted this year, it will never happen. That would be a criminal waste of fiduciary responsibility.
Then someone needs to tell the school board this, because if you listen to the Lake braddock and Silverbrook communities you would swear that Lake Braddock is busting at the seams. It is not fair to put more burden on Hayfield just because Lake Braddock does not want more students and Silverbrook or Newington Forest want to stay at South County. The good folks at Hayfield seem happy to welcome kids back but they should not have to take so many that Hayfield becomes overcrowded again in a few years.
The School Board knows this, F&P knows this, even the Crosspointe Crowd knows this (although they are in denial). Look at the FCPS numbers.
12/06/2006 1:53 PM
Below is the link to the minutes establishing a guideline of 85-90% for the SCSS-LBSS-HSS study.
http://www.fcps.edu/schlbd/minutes/20060508F&O.pdf
btw, It was a MISTAKE for them to look at LBSS and HSS as "one secondary school" and not separate the HS and MS capacity. That mistake has been pointed out and generally accepted.
What I'm reading is that the highest priority is BALANCING enrollent at the 3 schools. A similar comment is made at the end of the minutes.
If balancing the enrollment is a priority then option 3 is not acceptable.
http://www.nbc4.com/news/10461850/detail.html
This is an article on FCPS field trip supervision involving Lake Braddock. At least LB does not try to weasle out of it and say it wasn't school sponsored. Stuff at Langley is far worse than this and never makes the news so for those of you who wish for another Langley be careful. PR is more imprtant to FCPS than what actually happens.
Anyone west of 123 should probably be going to Braddock. Thoughts?
Balancing is the highest priority. You can achieve MUCH greater balance by putting HF at 85-90% per the guideline.
12/07/2006 7:32 AM,
I heard the principal at Lake Braddock is not good enforcing rules and keeping the kids in control. She is only interested in academics and keeping the grades up in that school. Remember last year, when they had that fight at LB and some kid got stabbed, well she did a great job covering it up. A lot more was not said about the incident!
When the nice kids & parents from Silverbrook ES start going to Lake Braddock it will help.
or, the nice kids and parents from Newington Forest!
Anyone west of Hooes and north of Silverbrook should be attending South County. Bringing NF into LB will add too many students.
GO 2B!
"should be"? or should NOT be?
SHOULD NOT BE attending SC and SHOULD BE attending LB. This would be North Crosspointe, Barrington, South Run Oaks,etc.
Option 2B is the fairest option to all 3 schools. It doesn't strain the middle school resources of LB or H, yet it redistricts enough pupils to get South County much closer to capacity.
2A & 2B are pretty much the same, that's why the SB should go with 2A. It will not create a split feeder school out of Silverbrook! GO 2A!!!!
Newington Forest is much closer to South County than the northwest Silverbrook area. Don't push out the neighborhoods with the higher socioecononic demographics just so the rich fatcats can stay.
2B is definitely the wisest option for the School Board to choose.
Not to mention that the 2B area going to Lake Braddock has a much easier transit to Lake Braddock then would Newington Forest.
It's not just about Newington Forest vs Silverbrook geting redistricted to LB. It's what's best for H, LB and SC. 2B is the fairest option because it moves both high and low demographic populations. It moves both the northwest and northeast sections of SC to the secondary school that are to the NE and NW. Neither receiving school will go overcaoacity and SC gets to more manageable rate. Option 2B is implemented slowly over 4 years so that next year, only 7th and 9th graders would be affected. The following year it would be 7,8,9,10. The year after that would be 7-11. Finally in AY 10-11, all 6 grades would have the northwest parts of Silverbrook.
Post a Comment