Friday, November 13, 2009

Long-term solutions for Dulles North High Schools

Author:
I'm trying a new online experiment today. There is a lot of back-and-forth in the blog comments about Tuesday's vote to move Lansdowne to Tuscarora High School as a temporary measure. That move is water under the bridge now and the arguments are stale, but the long-term solution is still unknown. Let's get your thoughts on the right long-term solutions now.

I'm going to try an experiment for this, using Google Moderator. Please click here to make and vote on suggestions for a long-term solution for Dulles North High School crowding. I have already submitted nine ideas for your consideration, including those most commonly discussed. If we get enough feedback with this method I might use it to solicit public input on other topics in the future.

Of course you're free to use the comments section as well.
Labels: , , ,

66 comments:

  1. Where is the "long term plan" you spoke of when talking about HS6 being built now?
    ReplyDelete
  2. Remember folks, while there is all this boundary dissension and budgetary trauma, this School Board still finds time to have two private closed meetings in a month to discuss Hatrick's contract. And you wonder why nothing has really been solved?
    ReplyDelete
  3. The ideas that have been posted are good ones. We really need something outside the box to solve our lack of schools problem.

    I like the idea of eliminating some high school football/athletic fields to make room for large additions to existing schools. And then, share the remaining football fields. No new land required.

    If the county didn't want to build additions from scratch because of time constraints, there are companies that make pre-fab structures for school usage that include the normal lockers, lunchrooms etc that the existing school building has.

    I suppose the big questions are "How many more students would this solution support?" and "How much would this cost?".

    I think any solution that requires no new land purchases should be considered seriously.

    This sort of "no football fields" approach could also be taken with HS6-LVE to greatly enlarge it's capacity if the school were planed this way from the beginning. There must be some nearby athletic fields that could be used by HS6.

    What do you think of this John?
    ReplyDelete
  4. I still don't understand why we would be talking about adding classrooms/ lockers/ facilities to already-overcrowded schools when we have a school that is going to be under capacity for several years. No one wins. If everyone stays crammed into Stone Bridge, all the kids lose, but both Ashburn Farm and Lansdowne get to keep their precious Stone Bridge, at the expense of the kids education.

    I am not suggesting sending Lansdowne to Tuscarora per se but could the school board review all the Ashburn AND Leesburg high schools to redraw boundaries? If we included Broad Run and Heritage maybe another solution could be found...
    ReplyDelete
  5. Why is the discussion long-term solutions for Dulles North? I thought the problem was Ashburn. Or are we trying to decide what to do to fix the overcrowding that will be coming to Briar Woods?
    ReplyDelete
  6. I know you all have heard this story before, but I went to school in NYC, at one of the country's best high schools. 5 stories high. No athletic fields (football team travelled to The Bronx to play, and were division champs). Very few computers (well, it WAS the '80's!).
    Black boards, dry-erase boards, and teachers, teachers, teachers.

    It's time to ask where our county's priorities lie: do we care more about extra-curricular sports than about the curricula? Do we care more about 70 acres for school campuses than about services for people in need?
    ReplyDelete
  7. John
    Can you expand on the idea of a specialized academy and a charter school. What do you their focus as?
    ReplyDelete
  8. John, as a marketing professional I find this survey completely inappropriate and would consider any results from this completely void. A survey must remove all bias to be worthwhile, and should be conducted in a neutral site and tone. It should be a representative sample of the entire county, something you just won't get on your blog. That said, I do think a survey that is conducted properly, and one that comes from Loudoun County Public Schools as a whole, is a great idea. Additionally, all parents who have children in the school system should be made aware of this survey and should have equal rights to access and take this survey to speak your mind.
    ReplyDelete
  9. Sew Creative Mom, I appreciate the invitation to describe my thoughts on the academy model, there are many possibilities. At the moment community input is more important than my vision so I'd prefer to just gather feedback. There is a committee of the School Board that did a county-wide survey regarding academies and provided much of that community input, which brings me to the concern addressed by the anonymous marketing professional.

    In response to that comment, I remind you that this is just what it says... an experiment in gathering input. It isn't supposed to be scientific, it won't determine any official action by myself, the Board or LCPS. My simple hope is that it is may encourage a better discussion among the community.
    ReplyDelete
  10. Is there a breakdown of students by grade that live in Loudoun Valley Estates? I'm curious to see how many students there really are and what the impact to Briar Woods is for the coming years.
    ReplyDelete
  11. Stevens, If you're trying to encourage a more productive discussion, why aren't you more engaged with your peers to understand growth projections, funding, and the availability of land for schools. You're still acting like HS-6 is "the plan". There's no bond referendum, no room in the county's debt cap, and agreement from the School Board/BOS subcommittee that the next HS needs to go north of the Toll Road.

    Can't you encourage folks to have a discussion based on facts? Based on where we are and where we need to be, what are the best options. Placing "stick with the original recommendation" as an option doesn't encourage discussion. It throws salt on a wound.
    ReplyDelete
  12. I wish I had the perfect remedy for the overcrowding problems. The only thing that comes to mind is to aggressively slow down new development. Maybe we should simply protect what we have and let the student levels plateau...perhaps then we would see some relief. It is not just a school baord problem...it is an overgrowth problem.
    ReplyDelete
  13. John;
    I am a lansdowne resident and I am not sure what my options are on Dec. 3rd. Can yo tell me what to expect. Am I expected to speak to the two presented options or can I bring a 3rd option to the table??
    Help.
    ReplyDelete
  14. When you say that "Stevens" is "...acting like HS6 is the plan"; it seems that even you recognize that the obvious and expected location for HS6 is Loudoun Valley Estates in Ashburn.

    Wish lists are great but land in Ashburn is extremely expensive and not even available to buy. Let's throw in that we don't have any money to buy the land even if it were available.

    Now, it just so happens that we already own land in Ashburn at LVE that we have always planned to be the site for HS6. Could there possibly be a cheaper solution than building on land we already own within the very community that needs the school?

    The combination of all of these facts would make the purchase of more land for the same purpose ridiculous and irresponsible.

    I hope that the board is held accountable for the politically motivated goose-chase for the "phantom" land that we couldn't afford to buy.
    ReplyDelete
  15. To the last poster, what is your solution to the current overcrowding we have? Broad Run and Briar Woods are both at capacity and have no room.

    It'll be a minimum of 3 more years until HS-6 gets built and opens, probably more. So, in the meantime what do we do? And when HS-6 fills up with LVE students, what then? Is that a problem for somebody else to figure out?
    ReplyDelete
  16. Well, since you asked;

    IMO, the solution involves using our existing resources more wisely and efficiently by changing them and changing the design of new schools that will be built in the future.

    1) existing schools - greatly expand them both in classrooms and other required rooms (like an additional or expanded cafeteria for instance). Create the space required for this by eliminating some/all of the football/athletic fields/grounds at some/all schools. The athletic fields sit unused all but a few hours each week and waste lots of prime real estate.

    2) Save the best athletic fields or (better yet) build new lighted turf fields that are shared by several schools. This would eliminate rain cancellations and even allow local residents to attend all local home games since they wouldn't be played at the same time anymore.

    Our current schools are in the "right" places; they just aren't big enough. We could build multi-level parking if required for larger schools.

    2) new schools - Never build age-specific or one-level schools going forward. Always build large, generic 2+ story buildings. It wouldn't be a bad idea to build schools capable of duplex-style usage and modular (changeable) configuration. It should be possible to have complete physical separation of the halves (if desired) so that it would be possible to run a single building as both an middle school on one side and a high school on the other or just use it as one big elem/middle/high school. If planning needs changed, we could possibly just reconfigure an existing school rather than searching high and low to find some big tract of new land in a very expensive area.
    ReplyDelete
  17. so, Lansdowne does not want to go to Tuscarora, ok. What then do we do with the 2500 plus kids that will be at Stone Bridge in 3 years?? That is a high school and a half. Shipping some to Briar Woods cannot be an option as that school is looking at the same over-crowding numbers. Broad Run.. same deal. Heritage, well the same argument can be made about anyone moving there- too far, not in our planning area, bad roads....whatever. HS-6 fine but it is not built, not going to get built anytime soon, WHY?? NO MONEY!! And besides when and if it ever does get built, guess who goes there, the kids from Briar Woods and Broad Run who have been overcrowding those 2 schools. The only viable solution long term is another high school where the population actually resides along with another middle school so that the overcrowding at Belmont and Eagle Ridge can be alleviated. But those things take time and money. Right now, kids at Stone Bridge can't get the classes they want and the halls are a mess. Anyone who went to back to school night can attest to that-- and not every parent went to that event. This is a bad situation that will only get worse unless some measures are taken. I have visions of standing outside in front of Stone Bridge in 3 years at 2 in the morning with 500 of my closest friends wanting to get my 8th grader in so she doesn't have to be over-flowed someplace else. Do we really want that to happen?? OR worse have all the rising 9th graders at that time all be shipped someplace else? That is not something I want to see.
    ReplyDelete
  18. Guess you could always opt to transfer your 8th grader to Tuscorora where there is lots of room. Schools with extra seats always accept transfers. Brand new school, not crowded and no further than Briar Woods.
    ReplyDelete
  19. The post above regarding building additions to existing schools would solve the crowding problem for your child without new schools/land in the Ashburn area (aside from HS6 at LVE). All existing schools could be doubled in size.

    Tysons Corner went "down" to solve their problem, we can certainly go "up" and "out" to solve ours. It was the same problem; a valuable piece of land in a great location not being utilized to the fullest.

    Sell the land that the county owns near the ice rink in Ashburn to help fund the expansion of some existing schools and get this ball rolling. The "addition" solution should also be faster to bring online than building a new school from scratch.
    ReplyDelete
  20. Great, lets create mega-schools. That pretty much guarantees that only a small minority (the best-of-the-best) will be able to participate in athletic programs and other extra-curricular activities. Stone Bridge is competitive enough as it is for sports. Imagine how it would be if you increase the school population.

    And what about Tuscarora? Ignore the fact that it's already being built and will have plenty of capicity for overflow? Makes no sense to me but what would I know? I'm only a taxpayer.
    ReplyDelete
  21. There are plenty of places for the average athlete to play sports in Loudoun Co rec-league sports.

    We can't avoid the easiest, cheapest and fastest solution to our space problem to guarantee that every average kid can play on the SBHS football team. And in case you haven't noticed, there are tons of kids already that even though they have made the team, they still don't play. High school sports aren't the place for average kids to play even now, that's what rec-league is for.

    I guess if you really need your average-skilled kid to make it on to the SBHS football field, get them in the band?
    ReplyDelete
  22. If it's the best sports opportunity you want for your child then enroll her at Tuscorora, there won't even be any seniors the first year.
    ReplyDelete
  23. THS is a great option for sports opportunities and THS is essentially the same distance from Ashburn as it is from Lansdowne.

    I think to derail a serious conversation about real solutions to real problems for the sake of sports doesn't say much for our priorities though. This is much more important than that.
    ReplyDelete
  24. In a school system that is perpetually several steps behind when it comes to school construction, the opportunity to play sports is not that important. That's not what the schools are for.
    ReplyDelete
  25. Did anyone else go to a school that required special permission to be in more than one school-sponsored extra-curricular activity? My school had over 2800 students. My class had nearly 800 students. All but two went straight on to college. All but 7 graduated college w/in 4 years. All but 3 graduated from college eventually (one died in a fire before graduation).

    Most of us were in extra-curricular activities, but we had to choose. I don't see what's wrong with making our schools bigger. I don't see what's wrong with accepting that not everyone gets to do every activity that the school offers.
    ReplyDelete
  26. to the post regarding "adding on" to our current schools, where do you propose we get the money to do this??I don't think selling the ISA property will cover that cost. And we cannot go "up" unless the structure of the existing building was designed to handle another floor-- doubt it. And really do we want our children going to a school that houses 2500 kids? not me. Schools were built to house ~1600 kids for a reason and no it is not all about football or other sports. Over crowding schools even more will not only effect sports. It will mean tighter competition in ALL activities from band to drama to debate club. It will give us larger class sizes which will make for less individual attention. It will mean more competition for elective classes because the classroom space is being utilized for the required classes. It will mean later lunch times or longer lines for our kids. Special education will be impacted in negative ways. What do you do with the kids who need smaller class size to learn effectively? Too bad for them I guess. And after all this, no one has yet to tell me just what is wrong with sending the Lansdowne kids to Tuscarora. I do understand about having a child moved out of his or her school. It has happened to my children- but guess what, they adjusted. They do adapt to change- change can be good. This change will help ALL students excel and become all they can be. Remember colleges look at alot of things, not just academics and we need to give our kids all the opportunities we can- it is getting harder and harder to get into the schools they want.
    ReplyDelete
  27. Well, I guess if we have no money to expand our current schools then why are we searching high and low for "new" land...we wouldn't have money for it either, right? And wouldn't that cost more than expanding our current schools that happen to already be in the right places? Of course it would and it would also take longer.

    Your post goes on and on about the issues of over crowding (at SBHS) and implies that once Lansdowne moves to THS, problem solved. This couldn't be further from the truth.

    Ashburn will be pulled southward and Lansdowne will likely be back at SBHS in a few years once THS fills up and HS6 is built. So if Ashburn REALLY wants to stay at SBHS, the best chance to do so IMO is to enlarge the schools so that all of the surrounding communities can fit in the Ashburn area schools. At that point we don't have a boundary problem anymore.

    Expanding the schools must also mean expanding or duplicating the shared areas like lunch rooms etc so that you have the same high-quality experience at a big school that you would at a smaller school.
    ReplyDelete
  28. Why don't we move the proposed, as-yet-unfunded academy from Tuscarora to Heritage? That would free up some much needed space at Tuscarora so maybe this wouldn't have to be considered a temporary move for Lansdowne.

    And if you really think that HS6 is going to be built within the next few years, I'd say you're dreaming. We have NO money for construction so it could be many, many, many years before HS6 opens, if it is even built on the site we already have.
    ReplyDelete
  29. HS-6 will not be the next High School Built. HS-8 will be.

    Has anybody been paying attention to the fact that the BOS just this week voted to accept the recommendations of the Joint BOS/SB Committee? Three different votes (2 committees and then the BOS) in less than one month recognizing the issue that we need a new ES, MS, and HS north of the Greenway!

    We have not planned for enough schools where the children live which is the underlying problem. This is not the fault of the communities! It is not Farmwell Hunt's fault they got moved to Stuart Weller ES, or Regency's fault they got moved to Creighton's Corner ES, or Ashburn Farm's fault they were split between two middle schools, or Lansdowne's fault they may be moved to a new HS. It is poor planning -- so now we need to lead the charge to fix it!

    So let's stop wasting our time arguing over a boundary change that is the latest example of planning for schools in the wrong places and start figuring out where we can get a parcel of land (SBHS is on 57.5 acres) that can serve the Ashburn community. We need to be the "little engine that could" rather than have the defeatest attitude that has become so pervasive. We live in a Democracy, right?

    Lets take all the energy fighting this boundary change and make it productive for all our children.
    ReplyDelete
  30. I didn't realize anybody was fighting the boundary change. I thought that we were talking about what to do in the future after this temporary band-aid needs to be changed.

    Buying more and more land (with money we don't have) and then using it inefficiently is certainly not the answer.

    We need more "space" north of the Greenway for sure, that doesn't necessarily mean we need more new schools. We need to think outside the box; it's the same-old same-old that has gotten us into this mess in the first place.
    ReplyDelete
  31. According to staff documents shared this summer at the Joint Sub-Committee and then again updated this fall (after Sept. 30th numbers), we have A LOT of HS students that have no planned school. I've seen both 1500 students and now more recently 1800 students that we'll have in Ashburn north of the Greenway that will have no high school (that is above capacity of SBHS and BRHS).

    Do we really think that we can add that much capacity onto our two Ashburn high schools? Those numbers represent another FULL high school of students.

    With these numbers, trailers don't work either as we currently know them.

    How is getting land for a new high school north of the Greenway that is documented (by LCPS staff's own numbers) to be filled by 1500-1800 students north of the Greenway an inefficient use of our tax dollars?

    I would say that is fixing a planning problem.

    And if those at the BOS level don't see the problem, then why is Lori Waters looking for a solution for a full high school as we speak?
    ReplyDelete
  32. Everybody understands the problem; there are just different opinions on how to solve it.

    There are 3 high schools in Ashburn now and 4 once HS6 is built. Existing schools could be doubled in classroom and shared-area (lunch rooms etc) size and easily accommodate the demand without purchasing any new land.

    (Let me also add that my kids attend SBHS)
    ReplyDelete
  33. You can find better numbers in the current draft CIP released on November 10, 2009.

    If you look on page 63, you will see that BRHS hits a high at 2358 and that SBHS hits a high at 2586. So, I did the math two ways. One calculates capacity with the 9 trailers at BRHS included since they keep getting added into the staff numbers. The other calculates capacity taking BRHS back down to what it should be without trailers (1486) since we are told trailers should be temporary, not permanent.

    Here's the math:
    Projected Students - Capacity =

    4944 - 3272 = 1672 (with trailers)
    4944 - 3104 = 1840 (w/o trailers)

    So, doing this math using the current draft CIP prepared by the paid staff, we can expect between 1672 and 1840 students living north of the Greenway that will have no high school seat.

    So do we all need to get behind a new HS in northern Ashburn or not?
    ReplyDelete
  34. A couple of quick observations. The LCPS staff considers "Ashburn" to have two high schools which are BRHS and SBHS. The LCPS staff considers "Dulles North" to have the following high schools - BWHS, HS-6 (future), and HS-11 (future).

    HS-6 is not in the Ashburn planning area. HS-6 is expected to be filled by the students attending Stone Hill MS who will quickly overcrowd BWHS.

    A sidebar of interest, Dr. Adamo on March 10 said that there are 30,000 approved and unbuilt units south of the Greenway. Now put that into your long-term thinking....

    Finally, if you look at the numbers for BWHS on page 65 of the draft CIP, in 2014 BWHS will be 1219 over capacity.

    So where is this mythical "space" we keep hearing about? HS-6 is for the kids living south of the Greenway and can NEVER accomodate kids north of the Greenway.

    We need to start taking care of building schools for our kids in Ashburn and let those in Dulles North advocate for themselves.
    ReplyDelete
  35. John, can you help me with something to see if I remember this correctly. Didn't Broad Run have an addition or renovations already done? I thought I remembered that they expanded it -- lunch room?? classes?? what was it?

    Since I thought I remembered that they had already had renovations done, I Googled to see how big the land is for the school. Did I find the right number with 39 acres?

    So the thing that bugs me is whether Broad Run is a candidate as part of the fix or do we only have the newer schools that we could add onto?
    ReplyDelete
  36. Stone Bridge and Broad Run are in Dulles North. The attendance zones for those schools all begin with "DN". That stands for Dulles North. Lansdowne is also in Dulles North, although for high school, they are getting moved to CL (Central Loudoun).
    ReplyDelete
  37. I have a hard time understanding why Lansdowne is in the Dulles North area and not Central Loudoun. They are located in Leesburg...
    ReplyDelete
  38. HS 8 is needed, a middle school in Ashburn is needed- not sure what that magic MS number would be, 6 maybe, another elementary school is needed--- ALL of these are needed before HS6. So agreed we have no money, not going to get any soon. SO what to do, USE existing capacity until such time we are able to get the money for the schools we need-- where the population actually resides, north of the Greenway. Sending anyone north of the Greenway south is just not a viable solution, because what happens when those schools fill up with the kids that live there- everyone treks back north to Stone Bridge and guess what if no HS8, then it is back to Leesburg! Stop the bantering back and forth about this and begin to lobby for land and schools where they are NEEDED! Poor planning and lack of consideration for our children got us in this mess and it is up to us to fix it. Do nothing and we get nothing except the same problem over and over again, and who loses? the kids. My children will never benefit from any new high school or middle school, they are too old. They will ALWAYS be in an over-crowded school. Just how over-crowded is what concerns me the most- and 2500 kids in a school that holds 1600. Not something I want to experience.
    ReplyDelete
  39. I keep hearing about building on to Stone Bridge, just where does one add on to that school? Unless it has been designed to add another story, you can't do that. So what is planned, using the parking lot? Just wondering.
    ReplyDelete
  40. I think Bob O. has suggested expansion in several meetings. I know it's an expensive proposition, but I think we all agree the county can't continue to build these "standard" schools. If it were cost justified.......I for one would welcome expanding the schools......but not with trailors or some hodge podge solution. An expansion would need to ensure all school facilities support the enrollment........lockers, cafeteria, parking, etc. That being said.......wouldn't expanding these schools be like open heart surgery on the facility?
    ReplyDelete
  41. "I have a hard time understanding why Lansdowne is in the Dulles North area and not Central Loudoun. They are located in Leesburg..."

    According to county zoning, Lansdowne is in the Ashburn Planning District. The post office assigned a Leesburg zip code but apparently county officials don't feel beholden to post office decisions.

    It doesn't matter anyway. Leesburg kids have gone to Ashburn schools. Ashburn kids have gone to Leesburg and Sterling schools. Sterling kids have gone to Ashburn schools. And on and on. The BOS wants existing capacity to be used before new schools are built and so this is what happens. Sometimes (usually) existing capacity doesn't exist where the kids who don't have seats live.
    ReplyDelete
  42. What is confusing folks at this point is that the Planning Staff has modified the old Dulles North in the CIP and split it into "Ashburn" and "Dulles North" in this new CIP. It will be interesting to see if the designations of "DN" also changes with the modification that they have made this year.

    So, according to the Planning Staff, as of last week in their Draft CIP, SBHS and BRHS are in "Ashburn" and no longer in "Dulles North."

    Why is this important? Because it is finally being acknowledged by planning staff that the schools problem needs to be fixed north of the Greenway!
    ReplyDelete
  43. I don't know how you add onto Stone Bridge since it sits on 57 acres. It doesn't seem like there's a lot of room for new construction. I guess that parking would need to be taken away and kids could only take the bus??? Whoever said Open Heart Surgery put it mildly. And if the person is correct about Broad Run then there surely isn't any room there and all the extra kids would have to go to a Stone Bridge mega school. Not sure where this leaves us.
    ReplyDelete
  44. well, the numbers are in and posted on the plannig web site. After looking at them how can anyone not fight for a high school and middle school north of the greenway...OH, high school 6 is needed too-- Briar Woods is looking at 4000 kids in the out years... this is scary. In the mean time we better use what we have--because all of our kids need and deserve a great education and opportunities to grow. Maybe they can slove this mess!
    ReplyDelete
  45. Unfortunately, the county has been playing musical chairs with our kids for years and the music is about to stop and there aren't going to be enough chairs.

    If they don't get this fixed then I think we'll see people start moving out of the county. What choice will people have?
    ReplyDelete
  46. So, should the school board decide to go with a phase in where only rising 9th graders be made to attend Tuscarora, will that decision then apply to the Leesburg students who will be moving to Tuscarora too?? Will that force Tuscarora to potentially only open with a freshman class. I am thinking that the school board should not open that can of worms and stick with current policy.
    ReplyDelete
  47. Lansdowne should definitely be phased for several reasons. The Leesburg schools should not be phased for the same reasons.

    1) The move for Lansdowne is temporary, unlike the Leesburg students.

    2) The location of the school will create a hardship for Lansdowne residents. It's the wrong direction from where the parents work and you'll have to fight to get out there and then fight to get back only to continue to fight to get further east to your work on days that require you to drive your kid to school or to pick them up afterwords. There will be plenty of these trips and this too is different from the Leesburg folks. The parents with kids at Stone Bridge already should have the option of letting them finish with their friends that they have gone through the last 8 years of school with.

    3) Lansdowne will be the minority at the school and the other Leesburg kids will be going with their friends. For this reason, the Lansdowne kids already at Stone Bridge should be allowed to finish with their friends.

    4) The number of kids affected by Lansdowne phasing is not a huge number of kids (100 or so I think). This number doesn't burden SBHS much and doesn't fill THS much eiher. This is the very least the school board can do after shipping Lansdowne off to a distant school.

    5) THS was always part of the plan for Leesburg students; that certainly wasn't the case for Lansdowne.
    ReplyDelete
  48. ok your comments are understood, but what about all the other temporary moves that other neighborhoods have endured over the years, they were never given that option to phase in. It is not a bad idea just an idea that will create more problems in the future boundary debates.
    ReplyDelete
  49. IMHO, phasing is the pet project of Bob O and was added as an option to make it appear that Lansdowne students and their families would have a choice.
    ReplyDelete
  50. And I don't think it matters who's "pet project" it may be, it is the right thing to do for these students as outlined in the post above. If Lansdowne is given the choice, then it may be even less than 100 that stay and/or go. There's no reason to rip these kids away from their friends from middle school and 9th grade to start 10th grade where they know hardly anyone.
    ReplyDelete
  51. Wow! Fighting with someone on your side isn't advancing the cause. There are approx 130 current 8th graders that are affected and about that many current freshman. I know I didn't say that I supported either option, just that Lansdowne has been given two bad choices.
    ReplyDelete
  52. How is Tuscarora a "distant school" it is only 5 miles from seldens landing. Have you driven there??
    ReplyDelete
  53. Sew Creative - not sure if you were referring to me, but I honestly didn't mean to fight with someone on my side ;^).

    Perhaps my emotions got the better of me and it didn't translate well in print. Just hoping to get the best solution possible at this point.
    ReplyDelete
  54. For everyone in Ashburn that says that THS is not too far and that Briar Woods is too far for them. The distances in "miles" are similar, the distance in "time" is not even close. Give Ashburn farm the the option of Briar Woods or THS and see if anybody picks THS. It's very easy to talk about how easy somebody else's burden is. You don't really "get it" until you are in the same boat though.

    Ashburn seems to not only want Lansdowne out of "their" school (ridiculous) but they want them to suffer to the maximum extent in the process as well because they feel they have suffered in the past (I guess). What is wrong with these people? Who thinks like that? Ashburn won, Lansdowne lost, at this point why would Ashburn residents care at all about how the transfer of Lansdowne is implemented? Nothing worse than a sore winner.
    ReplyDelete
  55. Leaders incite behaviors in the groups of people they represent. This is true for both admirable and reprehensible behaviors.

    When you see a dirty football/soccer team, the coach of the team is usually responsible for encouraging this attitude and style of play. Same with honorable teams, a strong honorable leader won't field a dirty team.

    Ashburn has had a very poor example set by their school board representative Dupree. This process has been very divisive and painful as a result.
    ReplyDelete
  56. I have to respectfully disagree about poor leadership from Mr. DuPree. Yes, Mr. DuPree did make one bad comment after a 5+ hour marathon meeting that ended in a no-vote. I am not here to defend that comment, though I thought I had heard that he did formally apologize to the Lansdowne community.

    Now fast forward to last week. Mr. DuPree had more nasty ugly comments, accusations, and downright rude behavior aimed directly at him in a public forum. He graciously thanked every single speaker with no malice in his voice.

    Gratuitously insulting the man, while being upset with and finding bias in one remark he made seems very hypocritical. As a county, we have serious financial and logistical/infrastructure problems. Fighting amongst ourselves does not solve them. We all need to act with respect toward each other and fix this problem TOGETHER!

    I believe that this blog is supposed to be about "long-term solutions" We need to get back to that focus and come up with some suggestions so that Mr. Stevens has ideas to move forward with.
    ReplyDelete
  57. I don't think that Mr Dupree has ever apologized for his remarks.

    If the rude comments you're referring to are the completely-factual-statements made by community members regarding behaviors by some members of the board that were discovered as a result of the FOIA, well, yes it does stink to be caught. The statements are fact though, not slander.

    So, to me, the two situations are completely different.
    ReplyDelete
  58. I have never seen an apology from Mr. Dupree...and I've been paying attention to all the information posted with regard to this issue all year.
    ReplyDelete
  59. Can we PPPLLLLLEEEEAAAASSSSEEEE get back to some sort of useful discussion. This is getting old.........
    ReplyDelete
  60. Oh my goodness,
    1)to say "ashburn won and Lansdowne lost" you would think this was some sort of sporting contest. Everyone wins with less crowded schools.
    2) everyone has hardships when it comes to their kids and transportation, daycare, before and after school activities- a price we pay for having kids. No ones "hardship" is any greater or less than anyone elses.
    3)Changing the process of transition is fine-- phasing in is a good idea but there needs to be a clear policy on the matter. Is it for just this one instance or does it become policy for every boundary change in the future or will it be available on an as needed basis in the future depending on the situation. It would be nice to know, especially when we are looking at many future changes- esp. at the middle school level.
    4) parents set the tone for their kids, if you as a parent don't make the transition process smooth and you make it seem like the biggest tragedy in your child's life, guess what, it will be. My niece had to switch schools this year, her JUNIOR year. She has done fine and has made lots of new friends and kept up with the old. She is not and was not the most popular or outgoing kid and she has adjusted. She has an allegence to both of her schools, it is kind of neat to see!
    5)Name calling and accusations can be made both ways. This was not handled well from the beginning- (last winter)I am glad the process is nearly over (I hope) and we can all move on regardless of where we end up.
    ReplyDelete
  61. There doesn't need to be a policy for this transition. Every change made by the board stands on it's merits and faults. And the uglier the transition; the more sugar they need to apply to make the deal work for everybody. This is nothing new. Again, as an Ashburn resident, don't even see why you would care at all. You should just be glad it isn't you moving and remain quiet on issues that don't affect you at all.
    ReplyDelete
  62. Really? the transitions that my kids have had to endure have NEVER been sugar coated. They have had to live with the policy in place.
    ReplyDelete
  63. The ONLY reason that this "new" phasing policy is being discussed is because Bob Ohneiser is pushing hard for it. This is a core belief of his, and he has been talking about it since this process started back in March. If not for him, it wouldn't be on the table.
    ReplyDelete
  64. So now that Ashburn has "helped us" find a school, Ashburn wants to "help us" find the most painful way to go there?

    Unbelievable that anybody from Ashburn even cares. Ashburn has certainly "helped" Lansdowne enough. Ashburn's past bad experiences with the school board shouldn't be replayed now to achieve some twisted sense of parity. And we would do that I guess to scratch some sort of bitterness itch that some AF residents are apparently still carrying around??? Professional counseling would be the best choice for the bitterness issues. How about let's stick with logic and board-implied-commitment for that matter with regard to phasing.

    Karma is out there...

    "The jealous are troublesome to others, but torment to themselves."
    -- William Penn
    ReplyDelete
  65. I hope you find the counseling you need. Sounds like you are the one with the extreme case of bitterness.
    ReplyDelete
  66. Everyone in Ashburn cares about over-crowded schools-- no matter where you live. And building schools where people live should be a priority but for some reason the boards of the past have not though so. This is not a unique problem to Stone Bridge- it is a problem throughout Loudoun County. Except for maybe Eastern Loudoun where they have enough schools! Everyone has had to move, travel long distances, deal with kids making and losing friends. No one has been or will ever be immune until the schools are built and developers and the BOS are held accountable for the proper infrastructure. But until we can figure out how to get more money we must accept a temporary change and work to solve this dilemma. Talk of charter schools, magnet schools etc. is not a solution. Public schools as we have them are fine, we just need to work on getting them where we need them and it may take some drastic measures to get the land and money. It is what it is for right now. Sad as it may be.
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)