FCPS Outreach Response to the Community Meetings

The following is the FCPS response to concerns raised at the community feedback meetings. FCPS has not addressed questions concerning transportation or SACC impacts and costs.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Boundary Form Posted
Date: 28 Oct 2010 13:36:10 -0700
From: FCPS Outreach
To:

Parents and community members who were unable to attend the southwestern boundary meetings this week can provide their feedback to the preliminary boundary options by completing and submitting the Community Dialogue feedback form on the boundary website. Those interested can view a video presentation and review maps illustrating the preliminary changes to assist in their evaluation, which also are available on the boundary website at http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/southwesternstudy/index.htm . The form will be available until midnight Wednesday, November 3. Facilities staff will review respondents’ ratings and feedback and revise the preliminary options. These options will be presented in a survey for community feedback later in November.  

There are several updates to some of the data provided in the meeting handouts and feedback form; however, none of these updates substantively change the nature or characteristics of each of the three preliminary options.  In addition, the information below is in response to questions at the meetings that may be helpful in the evaluation of these preliminary options:

•  Each building addition will cost approximately $5-6 million.
•  Yearly operating costs for our elementary schools average $1.1 million.
•  Funding for building additions is available in construction reserve due to lower costs for construction and recent favorable bids for CIP projects.
•  Timing for implementation of boundary changes will vary with each option.  With the exception of boundary changes to Union Mill, Option A could be implemented as early as next year.  For Options B and C, implementation for boundary changes would be predicated on the completion of building additions that would not be ready until school year 2013-14.
•  Rising 6th graders are typically grandfathered per School Board policy. 
•  Changes to middle and high schools have not been proposed; feedback regarding the potential to send students that may be reassigned to Union Mill and Sangster elementary schools to feed to Centreville High and Liberty Middle and Lake Braddock Secondary, respectively, is specifically requested as part of the community dialogue process.
•  Other than the specific changes for Advanced Academic Center (AAP) students referenced in each of the preliminary options, no other changes to AAP student assignments has been proposed at this time.  Details about other potential AAP assignment changes may be forthcoming in the revised boundary options.       

 Elementary schools in the southwestern boundary study are: Bonnie Brae, Brookfield, Bull Run, Centre Ridge, Centreville, Clifton, Colin Powell, Cub Run, Deer Park, Eagle View, Fairfax Villa, Fairview, Greenbriar East, Greenbriar West, Laurel Ridge, London Towne, Oak View, Poplar Tree, Providence, Sangster, Union Mill, Virginia Run, and Willow Springs. Also, parents can provide their feedback on whether split feeders that may affect Robinson Secondary, Lake Braddock Secondary, Centreville High, and Liberty Middle should also be considered in this study. 

Submit your boundary study questions to FCPS!

FCPS has posted a link to a third-party website where they're collecting questions for the SW boundary study:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/southwestboundaryFAQ

Many possible questions are listed on this blog and in the forums we've linked to on the right.  Here are some questions that are still pending response from FCPS:

1. If the decision is to renovate Clifton ES, what would the impact be to Union Mill ES? Would Union Mill ES lose any students to Clifton ES and/or would Union Mill gain any additional students via trailers or additions?
 
2. What is the size of the new elementary school that is planned for the Liberty site? Has there been a traffic impact study performed on Union Mill Road? We are really concerned about added traffic to our quiet community.
 
3. Why does FCPS feel that the Liberty site is best suited for the construction of a new elementary school? The overcrowding is not in that location. We at Union Mill and other nearby schools do not want to be split up between multiple schools?
 
4. What capacity figures (student count) were used for the 2007 bond that included renovation for 6 elementary schools? Please list by school:
Beechtree ES
Stenwood ES
Westlawn ES
Franconia ES
Oakton ES
Lake Anne ES

Please take a few minutes today and submit your questions!

FCPS Enrollment Projections Off For This Fall

According to an article by Holly Hobbs in the Fairfax Times, FCPS enrollment projections last year were off for this Fall: 

"In elementary schools, the average change from the projected number to the actual enrollment was 50 students less than expected across seven grade levels, including kindergarten.


However, the system did not see an even distribution of change from the projections."


In other words, some schools saw dramatic increases (i.e., Bailey's E.S. with an increase of 142 students) while others saw a decrease (i.e., Silverbrook E.S. with a decrease of 84 students from the projected enrollment).

While I'm sure that none of us are complaining about an improved student-to-teacher ratio at many schools, nor arguing about the fact that there is overcrowding at some schools, it does highlight the fact that the demographers were wrong in their projections for enrollments at the start of School Year 2010-2011.  It certainly begs the question - if the demographers were wrong about this year, how wrong are they about what the FCPS Board is touting as a crisis in school overcrowding by 2015 (only to be made worse through the closing of Clifton E.S. and delayed additions to other elementary schools)?  Perhaps if the public was able to audit the enrollment projection data and reporting, we would have a better sense of the accuracy of the demographer's projections for 2015...

 

Meeting information inconsistencies

The following note was posted by Ms. Lisa Ide on the FCPS Discussion page on Facebook: 

Lisa Ide: I attended two of the Southwest Boundary Study Meetings, at Union Mill and Fairview. I had neighbors who attended 2 other meetings as well.

The FCPS School Board's claim that the same information would be distributed at all of these events was untrue.

All of us either sent an email to staff the week prior or asked both transportation and instructional representatives at these meetings where the current Clifton AAP students who attend Willow Springs ES would receive AAP services if their neighborhoods are changed to Fairview ES.

We received 3 different answers. In the email, Denise James claimed our children would get to stay at the Willow Spring ES/Rocky Run MS AAP centers. At the Union Mill and Greenbriar meetings, we were told that our children would go to whatever Fairview's AAP centers (White Oaks ES/Lake Braddock SS). At Willow Springs, we were told that our children would stay at Willow Springs ES/Rocky Run MS AAP centers. And at Fairview we were told that there was a typographical error on all of the maps and that they should read "ALL Clifton AAP students will attend the Sangster AAP center".

Also at Fairview last night, one poor instructional staff member told me that neither he nor any of the other instructional staff people actually knew anything about elementary schools in general or about the issues being discussed at the event last night. He said that he and the other staff at the meeting had simply responded to a request for volunteers to show up at these meetings. He said, "I work with High Schools, although I used to be an elementary school teacher. But I don't know anything really about any of these questions."

Clearly this process was NEVER designed to answer community members' questions or solicit any kind of informed input from the community regarding these boundary changes.

The only questions on the response form were ratings of the cost effectiveness of the three options and how well each option achieved the utilization rate range goal. Yet:
-NO INFORMATION about the costs of each option were provided to community members and NO ONE at these meetings had any complete cost projections available.
-NONE of the options achieved their stated goal of having *all* 23 schools within the 95-105% utilization rate range. The three options presented only achieved that goal in 47%, 52%, or 57% of the schools.

WHERE ARE THE NUMBERS?

AND WHERE IS OPTION D, WHICH WOULD ACTUALLY ACHIEVE THESE SUPPOSED "GOALS"?

WHERE ARE THE REAL ANSWERS?

I hope everyone remembers how poorly you and your children were served by this School Board come election time in 2012. It's time to clean house!

**EDITOR'S NOTE:  In an effort to consolidate community statements regarding the boundary study, we are collecting posts as we find them and/or linking to blogs/forums/articles where public debate is taking place.  We are concerned that some messages might disappear before the public has had an opportunity to read them.  If you know of a good blog entry, forum posting or media article, please send us a note or leave us a message so that we can cross-post it here (we make every effort to give credit where it is due - we just want everyone's voice to be heard!).**

Getting the word out (updated)

I have received several requests for media contacts. In addition to contacting your state, county (prior post), and FCPS (prior post) representatives, I would also encourage a letter campaign to both to state and local representatives, as well as local media outlets to illuminate this issue. Let them know how YOU are impacted by the broad strokes of the FCPS Southwest Boundary Study.

Send an email to your elected officials. Let them know what you think of the FCPS boundary study, how it has been handled, and how your neighborhood will be affected!  

Delegate Jim LeMunyon

703-264-1432 

jim@lemunyon.com

Congressman Frank Wolf

241 Cannon Building

Washington, DC 20515

(202) 225-5136

https://wolf.house.gov//index.cfm?sectionid=383

Michael Frey

Fairfax County Supervisor, Sully District

703-814-7100

sully@fairfaxcounty.gov

Kathy Smith

FCPS  Board Member, Sully District

571-423-1085

kathy.l.smith@fcps.edu

Tell the media what you think! Media contacts borrowed from SaveCliftonElementary.org and from other gathered research:

Julia O’Donoghue

The Connection Newspapers

Reporter

7913 WESTPARK DRIVE

McLEAN, VA  22102

(703)-917-6433

julieattheconnection@gmail.com

MARY KIMM

The Connection Newspapers

PUBLISHER, EDITOR

(703) 917-6416

mkimm@connectionnewspapers.com

Hank Silverberg

WTOP RADIO

hsilverberg@wtopnews.com

Sun Gazette

Scott McCaffrey, Editor

Phone: 703-738-2532

mccaffrey@acnpapers.com

Barbara F. Hollingsworth

Local Opinion Editor

The Washington Examiner

(202) 459-4945

1015 15TH STREET N.W. SUITE 500

WASHINGTON DC 20005

bhollingsworth@dcexaminer.com

William Flook

Reporter

(202) 459-4965 (W)

(410) 703-5602 (C)

The Washington Examiner

1015 15TH sTREET N.W. SUITE 500

WASHINGTON DC 20005

wflook@dcexaminer.com

WJLA News Channel 8

Lauren McCay

Producer

lmcay@news8.net

(703) 236-9555 News Room

(703) 236-9275 Direct

Craig Timberg, Washington Post education editor - timbergc@washpost.com

Writer feedback form to contact Kevin Sieff, who seems to write a lot about Virginia schools:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/articles/kevin+sieff/

WaPo education twitter account: @PostSchools

News tip email for WAMU: news@wamu.org

WAMU on twitter: @wamu885news
 
"Submit a Tip" form for TBD.com (comments must be less than 800 characters):
http://my.tbd.com/submit-tip/
 
From Shauna (co-owner on this blog):  I sent the following comments as a "tip" to TBD.com and to WaPo staffer Kevin Sieff:

Fairfax County Public Schools Board has dropped a bombshell on the parents of the southwestern region in the form of a "boundary study".  Parents and schools were informed 22Oct2010 that up to 26 schools could have boundaries redrawn, and "community dialogue meetings" were held last night and will be held tonight at Colin Powell, Fairview and Willow Springs Elementary Schools.  See these websites:

http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/2/434986/435715.html

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/128818.page

http://smallwoodhouselog.blogspot.com/

The public was NOT told that the boundary lines would be redrawn until last week.  Please cover this story and attend one of the meetings tonight - parents across the county need to be made aware of the drastic changes proposed by the school board!

What is really behind the FCPS southwest boundary study?

An anonymous reader left a link to http://savecliftonelementary.org this afternoon. The site contains the result of a FOIA request with emails pertaining to the Southwest Boundary study affecting our neighborhood. I am reposting the content here (it's extremely long, so be sure to click the link below the first email for the full text). It is an astounding read. Get to know your Board members.

----- Original Message ----From: hunt4vasenate@cox.net
To: Bradsher, Elizabeth (School Board Member)
Sent: Thu Jul 01 09:43:30 2010
Subject: RE: CIP Update: July School Board Action
Liz
If you wanted to argue that WSHS is in greater need of renovation than
Clifton ES and the schools should be switched in the CIP, I believe that
would be viable arguement andone that I would be supportive. It does not
require the closing of Clifton ES.
We obviously see this from a different perspective. I live in the Clifton
ES boundary area. I was a precinct captian in Clifton while not actually
voting there. I am a member of the Clifton Lions Club. I know this
community. I have fought for communities all across Fairfax County. Most
of the Clifton ES boundary area is not in the 37th Senate DIstrict. I also
work hard for children whether the live in Graham Road area or Clifton. To
state that I am advocating for my political future is counter to my track
record and an unfair assumption as to my motivations.
Steve

An Alternative Information Source

For those looking for information affecting the Southwest Fairfax county school boundary study effects, consider the website http://www.friendsofcommunityschools.org/. I question the use of Flash for simple picture display, but the information and links are useful in developing an opinion on the matter beyond FCPS as a sole source.

First impressions of Southwest Boundary Study "meeting" at GBW

After hearing a report from my husband and reviewing the literature that he brought home, I am appalled at the how the "Southwestern Boundary Study" meeting held at Greenbriar West ES this evening was conducted. In short, it was a supreme disappointment. It was not an open forum, nor were there opportunities for attendees to get questions addressed. Some of our questions (which were never answered by FCPS representatives at the meeting) include:

1. If my child attends a school impacted by the proposed boundary changes (and would normally be forced to switch to another school), will he/she be allowed to remain at the elementary school until he/she moves on to middle school?
2. If my child is allowed to remain at a school impacted by the proposed boundary changes, will his/her younger sibling be allowed to attend the same school? Essentially, will my children's attendance be "grandfathered" at the original school?
3. If my child(ren) is(are) forced to attend another school, will their SACC enrollment at their current school be honored, or will we be forced onto a waitlist behind children already attending the new school, even though we have been forced to change schools against our will?
4. When will the FCPS Board respond openly and honestly about their intentions to redraw boundaries for the middle and high schools?
5. How does the FCPS Board expect to address existing overcrowding issues? None of the "options" presented addressed this core issue.
6. Why didn't the FCPS Board inform the leadership of the schools affected that their schools were going to be directly impacted by the proposed boundary changes? For example, the leadership of Poplar Tree Elementary School was not aware that PTES would be directly impacted by these proposed changes.
7. Why didn't the FCPS Board inform the parents before Friday that their neighborhoods would be directly impacted by the proposed changes?

I expected that FCPS Board members would provide community members with an opportunity to ask questions regarding the Boundary Survey. I expected that, in one of the richest school districts in the country, information would be made more available to parents and educators.  However, the meeting was nothing more than a group think multiple choice test parading as "community dialogue" survey. Attendees were ASSIGNED to specific tables. The instructions provided were as follows:

- Each table should select a facilitator and recorder and evaluate the three preliminary boundary changes and options introduced in the presentation.
- If you have a question, please raise a white index card if it regards facilities and transportation issues and a blue index card for any other question. A meeting assistant will direct a staff member to your table to answer your question.
- The facilitator should keep the group's discussion focused on the evaluation of the three options.
- The recorder should take notes of your table's responses to the preliminary boundary changes and options.
- Your group should rate each of the three preliminary options - from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest) and submit your results and the sign-in sheet prior to leaving.

Groups were required to reach a consensus, and information provided to the groups was extremely limited. In other words, individual responses were NOT tolerated. Questions asked by group members were responded to with very bland and uninformative answers. If the FCPS Board was looking to get Option C supported by the community, they certainly succeeded; it was the least horrible option and groups were effectively peer pressured toward supporting it.  Again, this was not a "community dialogue" - it was a group think multiple choice test.

Here are pictures of the questionnaire that groups were instructed to complete.

According to the information passed out to meeting attendees, "Feedback from the six boundary meetings will be posted on the Southwestern Boundary Study website at http://www.fcps.edu/fts/planning/southwesternstudy/index.htm. I encourage all parents, whether or not you feel you're impacted by this situation, to keep checking on the meeting feedback in order to identify whether or not our voices are being heard.

The handling of this "boundary survey" has been broken from the beginning. Parents feel that the Board has been deceitful and underhanded in their actions. The FCPS Board must respond to these concerns swiftly, completely and transparently.

Discussion about FCPS SW Boundary Survey

http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=345285&paper=81&cat=110

Interesting reply to consider.

Re: FCPS Southwestern Boundary Study (Elementary Schools)

Posted by: Experienced ()

Date: October 24, 2010 07:44PM

Probably the single least effective argument to oppose a proposed boundary change is to complain about its potential impact on property values. The School Board members absolutely LOVE it when people make that argument. They are more than ready to tell any reporter who will listen that the opponents of a redistricting don't care about providing children with equal opportunities to get a solid education, but only about their own real estate values. Then others will jump on board and point out that you should have realized when you bought your house that the boundaries could be adjusted at any time, particularly in the fast-growing SW part of the county.

The good news for your area is that it may well be the case that the School Board favors the third option, which would involving building additions at three schools and moving fewer students. Rest assured that Kathy Smith and Liz Bradsher have probably already made a deal and decided what they are going to do to your neighborhoods.

FCPS Southwest Boundary Study

Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) is conducting a boundary study to address overcrowding of elementary schools in the Southwest area. This includes Hunters Run and its local schools: Poplar Tree ES, Brookfield ES, and Greenbriar West ES.

The boundary survey proposes three options affecting Hunters Run and neighboring communities. They include

Option A: The communities of Hunters Run, Marian Woods, Poplar Grove, and Poplar Park will be reassigned from Poplar Tree ES to Brookfield ES.

Option B: The communities of Hunters Run, Marian Woods, Poplar Grove, and Poplar Park will be reassigned from Poplar Tree ES to Brookfield ES.

Option C: The communities of Hunters Run, Marian Woods, Poplar Grove, and Poplar Park will remain unchanged, continuing to send their children to Poplar Tree ES.

Residents of Hunters Run, Poplar Park, Poplar Grove, and Marian Woods should be concerned by options A and B. Compared to Poplar Tree ES, Brookfield ES represents a stark downgrade in testing scores and increased documented disciplinary issues. Consider the following data available from the FCPS website and a school ratings site popular with parents, GreatSchools.org.

Poplar Tree ES

• Demographic Data
• Standardized Test Results - Students consistently perform well.
• Reported School Security Issues - The only reported issue is a disorderly student.
• GreatSchools Report

Brookfield ES

• Demographic Data - Half of the school is on free/reduced lunch, indicating a lower economic status of the community currently served.
• Standardized Test Results - There is a clear divide between the socially advantaged and disadvantaged at this school. Much of teachers' efforts will be put into bringing underperformers to baseline, neglecting those already performing at standard.
• Reported School Security Issues - The school reports a range of problems, from drugs/alchohol to weapons and assault charges.
• GreatSchools Report

Homeowners of the affected communities will recognize an immediate impact to the value of their home if this school reassignment comes to pass. Consider comparing typical 3-bedroom and 4-bedroom recently sold home values between the affected neighborhoods and the areas currently served by Brookfield ES. Also consider the Fairfax County Crime Mapper, comparing the affected neighborhoods to Brookfield. There is a clear difference in value.

October 2010 Reported Crimes around Brookfield area

Linked is a historical implementation of boundary changes affecting high school students. That implementation affected only new enrolling students and transfers. It is unknown if currently enrolled students will be able to remain at their current schools.

Even if your household has no children in the school system, all of the affected neighborhoods are homes designed for families. Any future sale of your home will list Brookfield ES as the providing school, which will be a detractor for many potential buyers. That will limit the home's potential value on the market. The boundary study affects all property owners in the affected communities.

Linked is information on meetings accepting public comment on the proposed boundary implementations. Key meetings for our area are

Monday, October 25 7-9pm at Greenbrier West ES
Tuesday, October 26 7-9pm at Powell ES

Community members of Hunters Run, Marian Woods, Poplar Grove, and Poplar Park should attend one of these sessions and express their support for Option C against the reassignment of our neighborhoods to Brookfield ES. They should also contact their county representatives to express their views.

FCPS Sully District - Kathy Smith  571-423-1085
Fairfax County Supervisor Sully District - Michael Frey  703-814-7100.