Wheatland Death Rattle

Some members of the public and School Board are still trying to resuscitate the Wheatland property for school use. There are suggestions fluttering around to nix the high school use and having only elementary and middle or to buy it for an agricultural center/park and then use it for schools if Lovettsville properties fall through. Even one of the most visible, vocal and staunch opponents suggested we could always open new negotiations with Cangiano should the Lovettsville options fail.

SOL Rollback?

An interesting story this morning from the Washington Post: VA Ponders Eliminating Third-Grade History Exam.

I've never been a fan of SOLs, especially for younger students:

Forty multiple-choice questions cover material from kindergarten through third grade, which state officials say puts an unfair burden on the memories of young children.

On the other hand, I'm surprised to feel a twinge of concern, expressed well here:

"In an environment where some subjects are tested and some are not, guess which lose out," said Bill Brazier, social science supervisor for Loudoun County schools.

Wheatland is Dead

LTM
LT
LE

I expect a call later this morning to schedule a quick meeting on Monday June 1st to formally withdraw from the contract.

Update: The meeting is posted for 1:30pm on the LCPS website:

There will be a special meeting of the Loudoun County School Board at 1:30 p.m. on Monday, June 1st, pertaining to the Wheatlands contracts. The meeting will be in the School Board Meeting Room at the School Administrative Offices, 21000 Education Court, Ashburn.

Wheatland extension

The School Board voted last night 6-3 to continue its efforts to acquire the Cangiano/Burgess properties to build three schools serving the community north of Route 9 in western Loudoun.

Those who voted yes believe that it is the best deal available, and that the public will someday understand that. For now though, it isn't the public in the future whose approval is needed, it is the current members of the Board Supervisors. My colleagues believe that sometime in the next five days the Supervisors can be convinced that this is the right place at the right price.

I was one of three who voted no, not on the merits of the proposal but simply in recognition that there is slim chance that the Board of Supervisors will approve the funding needed to complete the purchase. I don't wish to spend additional public money on a dead project.

Updates:

1. LCPS posted a presentation on potential Lovettsville school sites that was presented to the School Board last night.
2. Loudoun Independent posted a thorough story: Wheatlands Survives.
   

Special Education Town Hall

Sew Creative Mom (SCM) said...

What were your thoughts about the Special Ed Town Hall Meeting earlier this week?

I attend a lot of Special Education Advisory Committee meetings, and had been looking forward to the Special Ed Town Hall Meeting. Although I was there to greet everyone, I had a family commitment and was not able to stay after the first speaker. SCM blogged about the meeting herself:

The purpose of the meeting was to address systemic issues using personal experiences, without violating privacy. Only a group of special ed parents would agree to or understand these limitations!

I cited this line because I see the difficulty in asking parents of individual children to speak to systemic issues every month at the SEAC meetings. Special Ed is wrapped in privacy laws, so parents have a difficult time finding out about others' experiences (systemic issues) short of joining an advocacy group that shares experiences. The individual experiences need to be referred to the professional staff, and are, but in doing that they cannot contribute to the SEAC or School Board's understanding of what systemic issues are. It's all quite frustrating.

Now read the lines that made me smile:

Before I left, I volunteered to be a Special Ed Advisory Committee PTA Representative, a job that I think will be a good fit for me. I left, once again, relieved to have such wonderful dedicated people working with my son.

The SEAC is recruiting PTSO representatives, trying to have a Special Education parent active in every PTSO. I wholeheartedly support this effort. It will help the parents of neurotypical kids to understand the needs of their kids' classmates and how each school can be more welcoming in its PTSO-sponsored events. It will make the PTSOs more welcoming to the parents of kids receiving Special Education services. It will increase communication between the parents of those kids and help them identify which of their experiences are systemic, which are unique to their school and which are unique to their child. It will provide future leadership to the SEAC.

Finally SCM can see, as I do that despite the challenges of Special Education, the people involved really care and are trying their very best to give each child the best education that child can have.

I look forward to hearing other perspectives about the May 19th Special Education Town Hall meeting.

Bergel on Wheatland: Responding to Burton

Introduction Post

This is one of a series of posts relating a letter from Catoctin District School Board representative Jennifer Bergel to her constituents regarding the Cangiano/Burgess Wheatland property acquisition. This section addresses statements made by Blue Ridge Supervisor Jim Burton in an email to citizens.

Jim Burton has sent an email that includes the following information:

“During a meeting in which I participated last week, we discussed three sites closer to the Town and determined that school planning staff had already directed their engineers to investigate the two closest to Town. While I do not know the [sic] what the price of these alternatives might be, they would certainly be in far greater compliance with the County's Comprehensive Plan.”

Because constituents whose emails in support of the site have received responses with these words, it is imperative that I set the record straight.

1. After the community input meeting in Lovettsville on April 29, I spoke to staff about whether or not the “Engel/Schoene” potential site would be possible for the hypothetical price of $13 million. This possible alternative was mentioned in this meeting, and I asked staff to look at it because it linked a parcel in the town to a parcel out of the town. I had immediate reservations about the price; immediate reservations about the viability; immediate concerns about the impact on a town that currently has very few middle/high school buses driving through it. I also had concerns about the bank and a historical home; but I asked them to look into the site to get a snapshot of its possibilities. Mr. Engle has not mentioned an intention to sell; Schoene is advertised by the developer as for sale. I should have information to share on this concept - but again, it is only being looked into because of public interest in this option.

2. Before the community meeting took place, I was approached by an individual about a possible assemblage in the Lovettsville area. This person asked me to keep things private in order to “protect the landowners”. I asked this person to whom else he was speaking so that I could cross reference the parties. Furthermore, I informed him we are under contract and that I am no longer able to speak to land deals. I directed him to staff, mentioned the community meeting, and upon my arrival staff indicated a meeting time and date had been set with this person. Last Thursday I found out that this person had spoken to Mr. Burton about this assemblage. I was quite surprised to hear this testament from Mr. Burton because the potential “broker” had acknowledged a concern for those local residents involved yet he went to an elected official that did not represent him. Furthermore, I began to wonder to how many had this person spoken.

I assured Mr. Burton that indeed staff had already started to look at this assemblage, but even if it were to come together, it still did not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. And, there was a need for serious road improvements, among other things, IF it were a viable site. I stated that I was alarmed that someone was shopping a “potential” assemblage. As of yesterday (5/13), Mr. Burton is the only one who has seen the contracts - LCPS staff continues to ask for them to determine the validity of this "possible" site.

3. The other site Mr. Burton mentioned, and I challenged, is the Wheeler Farm on Irish Corner Road. I mentioned to him the number of historic structures on the site, the fact that a dirt road (Dutchman's Creek Rd.) runs through the two properties, the flooding of the creek along the road and by the water treatment plant, and that again, the Comprehensive Plan is not in place with this site. Yet, this site is one that he mentioned may be viable.

Next post: Conclusion of May 14th Letter

Bergel on Wheatland: Location

Introduction Post

This is one of a series of posts relating a letter from Catoctin District School Board representative Jennifer Bergel to her constituents regarding the Cangiano/Burgess Wheatland property acquisition. This section addresses the location of the property.

Along the major transportation artery; school traffic would be removed from the road sooner than later; appearance of little to no right of way acquisition needed. Priceless.

Community concerns – increased traffic along the major road – Rt. 287. Will there be a light before the light at Rt. 9? What will the impact be?

My observations:

1. VERY few middle and high school buses touch Lovettsville proper. As one travels South on 287, a number of roads “spill out” – thus the buses get on the road and move toward Purcellville. This will not change with the opening of Woodgrove. Five buses that go into Lovettsville come from the Lovettsville Road area. About 14 others hit 287. The middle and high school bus traffic is already on 287 and will continue to be.
2. How many remember that there has not always been a light at Rt. 9 and Rt. 287? Less than 20 years ago the light was NOT there. The traffic back ups at this location are of a historic nature. I do not believe by-right development will help the traffic. By-right development does not necessarily force road improvements. I have witnessed this fact near my home and near the homes of many in this part of Loudoun.

Next Post: Addressing Burton's Email

Bergel on Wheatland: Price

Previous Post: Intro

This is one of a series of posts relating a letter from Catoctin District School Board representative Jennifer Bergel to her constituents regarding the Cangiano/Burgess Wheatland property acquisition.

When a headline blazes “Panel Narrows Western High School Options” and the two sites in the article that are mentioned are Miller and Wheatland Farm, is there any question as to whom has the advantage? And these two were whittled down from a list that was considered by the Western Schools Task Force – a list focused on MS-10 and HS-10 future school sites.

Leesburg Today headline December 20, 2007
Panel Narrows Western High School Options

Within a few weeks of this headline, it was clear to the public that the Miller farm was NOT for sale - the family asked for it to be removed from consideration. The letter was sent to LCPS staff, and the family has since followed up with email confirmations that the farm is not for sale.

Within the first few weeks of 2008, it was clear to me as the newly elected school board member where “we” might be heading for a possible land acquisition for HS-10 and other needed-schools. Nonetheless, Mr. Burton, Ms. Kurtz, Mayor Walker, Ms. Godfrey, and I met with LCPS staff to discuss our options for school sites.

The voters had approved land banking an HS-10 site – the priority was to find one.

People other than planning staffs spoke to one of the landowners.

An RFP was advertised for schools needed North of Rt. 9 – it was done at the request of elected officials based upon a constituent request.

My Observations: Though the price is a concern addressed by many, I saw it as justified because it allows land banking for future schools needed by a geographic region. Furthermore, it is on the major transportation artery for the region. Purchasing now as opposed to later should save money – land is of limited availability. The voters have APPROVED the acquisition of land for these future schools. I understand the price is high to many – but I am not sure if the price would ever be “right” for schools in this location. And I am very concerned about how much the “price” will be if this acquisition falls apart.

I am aware that people are suggesting other prices are better on land. For example, the $1.2 million property that is in Morrisonville but has a Lovettsville address. I wrote an email to a person using it as a basis for comparison asking the following questions, among many: Have you spoken to the 50-plus landowners on Morrisonville Road that would be impacted with ROW acquisition? Some of them would lose their homes. Plus, the village is historic. Furthermore - have you spoken to the landowners that would be impacted by a road being developed through their properties?

In response to the $3.4 million property on Purcellville Road - access is problematic. It is in the geographic area, though, and it too is slated for development, but I do not think it is fiscally responsible to go to that site. However, it is for sale for a lesser price.

Next Post: Location

Bergel on Wheatland: Intro

Catoctin District School Board Representative Jennifer Bergel was a grass-roots activist on western school issues for years before being elected to the school board. She was an ally of many of the current Wheatland Alliance activists against LCPS acquisition of the Grubb property nearby the Wheatland site now under consideration. In her 16 months on the School Board she has taken a leading role in a number of issues and her voice on issues often conflicts with the positions of her incumbent colleagues and the Administration. On the difficult issue of the Wheatland property, where most School Board members have been silent since raising their hands in favor of the contract (after concurrence from the majority of the Board of Supervisors), Bergel has taken on the difficult and central role of holding ongoing discussions with activists, elected leaders and her constituents.

She is beginning a series of informational emails to her constituents on the issues surrounding the purchase. There are so many issues involved that she writes "due to the length of my comments, I am dividing them into several emails." Even then, the first letter is over three pages long, so I'm going to break it up into separate posts. You can download the full letter in PDF format.

Reasonable people can disagree on most of the issues up for debate on this property purchase. The tone of some (not all) members of the opposition has been disturbing, and makes it difficult to engage in the discussion at all. It is the obligation of leaders to set aside the rancor, calmly face controversy, and address the issues on the merits for the benefit of those who are trying to discuss them on those terms. Jennifer Bergel is doing just that and deserves credit for it no matter what side of this issue you are on.

Here, the introduction to the letter:

Good Morning,

I will be sending comments over the next couple days to address what I said at the board meeting on Tuesday (and adding other notes). This meeting was the first time since recent events that I had to address Wheatland in public, but due to the length of my comments, I am dividing them into several emails.

I will also address Mr. Burton's email that he has sent to those of you who support of the site. I am sorry that you were given a form letter response to such an important issue.

Next Post: Why Wheatland?: Price

The Special Exception Process for Schools

At the November 13, 2008 meeting of the Joint Committee of the Board of Supervisors and School Board, members of both boards discussed, along with staff, a new process for acquiring land for schools. This process was to give the Supervisors up-front approval of land sites before LCPS entered into negotiations with property owners. This process was followed over the past six months and resulted in a contract on the Wheatland property. The meeting transcript is available online. I thought I'd go back and revisit some of what was said. The emphases in the text are mine. I have provided strike-throughs where I have changed individual words from the original transcript to reflect what I believe was actually said.

Jim Burton:
But once we’ve settled jointly between us boards on a site, and allowed them to go forward and negotiate a price, once that price is agreed to and if it meets the parameters we gave them, then there will be more than apple opportunity for the public to comment, I do believe, because we will have to go through a public process for a Commission permit, and until we get rid of this Special Exception, more often than not, that will still be there.

Sarah Howard-O’Brien:
We have tried and to negotiate contracts that will allow us to complete the entire Land Use process, in other words, get our special approval or legislative approval before we close on the property. The point that I want to raise here that everyone should be award of is that because of the time involved with the Land Use process, getting land owners to agree with that is becoming increasingly difficult. The policy makers need to be award of that in terms of future contract negotiations that folks are reluctant to tie up their property or keep it off the market for extended periods of time.

John Stevens:
But wouldn’t the ability to back out of a contract on that site for a cause like that, not be part of the Special Exception process, but simply part of the contract. Do we have that in our contracts already?

Jim Burton:
You can write contracts with all kinds of language that provide escape clauses. And you have all kinds of eager lawyers who would help you with that.

John Stevens:
Is that a current practice, Dr. Adamo?

Dr. Sam Adamo:
We typically right now try to protect the School Board as much as possible. And typically we always schedule our closings for dates that we believe that we should have all necessary approvals in place. As Sarah outlined, that is becoming more and more difficult. But we do try to protect the School Board’s position at all times.

(Assistant County Administrator) Paul Brown:
But there are times that because we know a Special Exception is going to have to be done, we have brought contracts and recommended to the Board, taking the risk, that even if you subsequently deny this Special Exception, we think that you should buy the property now because the property owner is not willing wait until the end of that process. The risk we are taking is, that at the end of the day, the Board could vote and say, no you can’t put a Fire Station there, it’s not going to work, and we would still have to buy that property. We’d have to sell it or look for another use. So that risk is inherent right now in the current process.

On Negotiating in Public

At the November 13, 2008 meeting of the Joint Committee of the Board of Supervisors and School Board, members of both boards discussed, along with staff, a new process for acquiring land for schools. This process was to give the Supervisors up-front approval of land sites before LCPS entered into negotiations with property owners. This process was followed over the past six months and resulted in a contract on the Wheatland property. The meeting transcript is available online. I thought I'd go back and revisit some of what was said.

Jim Burton
It’s difficult to open the process up to public input before you have negotiated with the land owner, it’s very difficult to do, and I don’t know how to do it.

Scott York
And I agree with that and the public should not misinterpret that.

Robert DuPree
The second issue that was mentioned was the balance that needs to be between transparency and the need for confidentiality. There is a reason why the Code of Virginia allows Executive Sessions and that is when public discussion could impair the bargaining position of the public body, and we have an obligation to the tax payers to do that.

How we got to Wheatland

At the November 13, 2008 meeting of the Joint Committee of the Board of Supervisors and School Board, members of both boards discussed, along with staff, a new process for acquiring land for schools. This process was to give the Supervisors up-front approval of land sites before LCPS entered into negotiations with property owners. This process was followed over the past six months and resulted in a contract on the Wheatland property. The meeting transcript is available online. I thought I'd go back and revisit some of what was said. The emphases in the text are mine. I have provided strike-throughs where I have changed individual words from the original transcript to reflect what I believe was actually said.

(Assistant County Administrator) Paul Brown
What we are requesting permission to do is to try this for the next six months, so that you have plenty of time to tell us what’s working and what’s not working, what need to change, and a that period we would come back and say here’s a final recommendation on the process, so that you could forward to both boards for action to carry on from there.

The materials that we brought to you [the Board of Supervisors] in the briefing would be a complete overview of the current assessed value, the sellers’ asking price, the actual budget that was established to purchase the property. So within the frame work of that, you would be having a discussion of are you comfortable with that range. And it was understood by everybody on that subcommittee that if the seller picked a price above the budget range, or above a threshold that you all had a consensus about in closed session, the school board would have to come back to you and discuss that before they could execute the contract at the price level.

They are not bringing you one piece of property. When they come to brief you, you are going to get an array of anywhere of between three to then, or twelve, fifteen parcels. Every parcel that was evaluated.

Supervisor Jim Burton
I believe that if we go about this briefing process correctly, our staff and there their staff fully understand what is going on, and we as a board get briefed on the sites that they have looked at, the sellers asking price, the budget for the purchase, and the accessed assessed value, that during that discussion we expect to set parameters for negotiations. And if they go beyond those parameters of feel that they have to, they would have to come back to us.
...
I think that where the majority of the change is in the beginning. That we get together and have a meeting of the minds on whether to march down this road towards this site or that site by looking at all of them before hand
...
But once we’ve settled jointly between us boards on a site, and allowed them to go forward and negotiate a price, once that price is agreed to and if it meets the parameters we gave them, then there will be more than apple opportunity for the public to comment.

Robert DuPree
As Mr. Burton said, if something deviates significantly, then yes, it has to come back and be vetted and make sure we are all on the same page. But I do want to us to try figure out what is that threshold and we may not be able to define it, but [it] can’t just be because somebody changes their mind on either board. We’ve got to have a degree of certainty that once two boards have joined hands together and are moving forward on this process, we can move forward on this process.

John Stevens
Under this process, would the BOS be able approve a specific site from for initiation negotiation, and then have the School Board put the site under contract, and then have BOS subsequently deny a Special Exception for that site?

Jim Burton
All things are possible. I would not envision that happening. But you never know what’s down the road after you do go through your due building diligence processes. You may discover all kinds of bodies on the site. Who knows? It’s possible, but it would be highly unusual.

John Stevens:
Under this process, can the BOS insist on a particular site for a school without of the consent of the School Board?

Paul Brown: No. I think what they will be giving you feedback on is the sites that they don’t want you to go to, which will put you in the position of having to come back to them with another site that they are more comfortable with.

Much more to come.

Guest bloggers

I received a request today from someone asking whether I would allow "guest blogger" posts here. The short answer is "yes."

In the past I have offered this space to my School Board colleagues. Some have permitted me to post their words but none has decided to make a post themselves. Only one other School Board member has a blog, Tom Reed's Loudoun Schools Dais.

The name of the blog is "Our Loudoun Schools." The purpose is to encourage better online information and discussion of issues pertaining to the Loudoun Public School community. I don't consider it my personal space, though I do manage it.

I extend the invitation to everyone, even (especially) those who disagree with me on any issue. This is a community space. I won't edit anyone's work, but I will insist on maintaining a few standards that differ from the comments free-for-all.

1. The subject of the post must relate directly to the Loudoun Public School community.
   
2. No anonymity, except for students (yes, students... I would love to have middle & high-school contributors). Kids would need to be known by me, and would have a handle, but could be anonymous to the world. Adults should act like adults, and put our names to our thoughts.
   
3. Stick with the issues. There must be a recognition that reasonable people can disagree. There are plenty of other places online to post venom and slander (including the comments section of this blog. I loathe reading such attacks in the comments section but I will not police them except in extreme cases).
   
4. Claims of fact must be documented. This is a subjective standard and will be enforced loosely, but given the degree of speculation I see in other places it is important to me for this blog to be a relatively reliable source of information.

I think that's enough. If the need for other ground rules becomes clear I will update this list, and can hold me to the same standards. If interested, write to me at: Stevens@LoudounSchools.org.

Western Schools Controversy

Fresh on the heels of a tough budget process and an extremely contentious (and nearly county-wide) boundary adjustment at all grade levels comes another explosive controversy surrounding schools: the potential purchase of land south of Lovettsville for building new schools.

I first brought this to readers' attention by publishing Catoctin District representative Jennifer Bergel's original letter to her constituents on the subject, in early March. There was a little coverage when the contract was originally signed: (Loudoun Times Mirror, Leesburg Today, LCPS).

It wasn't until the past week that the issue hit the headlines though:

Loudoun Independent, Leesburg Today, LoudounExtra, Loudoun Times, Beyond the Blackboard

My own approach to contentious issues is to focus on the facts that I can find from the experts hired to provide them. If you're interested in finding out more, LCPS published a Wheatland Fact Sheet online (PDF) this week. I also found memorandums drafted back in February by LCPS staff and County staff addressing concerns about the property's price.

Prior the the School Board's approval of the contract, the County planning staff and a majority of the Board of Supervisors gave their support to all of the terms based on their review and expertise. A professional appraisal confirmed the property value. The deal had the support of all four of the area's elected representatives: Ms. Bergel, Ms. Kurtz, Mr. Reed & Mr. York. This was the basis of my support. The Lovettsville town council voted unanimously to endorse the location. To my knowledge, none of this has changed, and no new information has come to light since the aforementioned backed the project.

Last night, Blue Ridge District representative Priscilla Godfrey wrote a letter to the Board of Supervisors, who are now backing away from the deal. I am quoting it in full below, and highlighting what I found to be of particular interest. I'll leave you with her thoughts.

I am writing the Board to provide more compelling details of the decision to purchase school sites just three miles south of Lovettsville. Just before the supervisors changed the zoning in western Loudoun, many properties were sold to developers who have since subdivided and placed wells so that they would be grandfathered in at greater densities (one house per three acres). Over 2,000 homes are in place to be built in western Loudoun, many of them in the northwest corner where these schools are planned. Another 266 homes have pending applications for approval. At our current rate of .83 students per single family detached, we will have 1,894 students in need of classroom space.

We just finished a boundary process for elementary schools in western Loudoun; our total student capacity is 4,544 and by 2013-2014 we will have 4,165 elementary students which means there are only 379 elementary seats not occupied in 2014 hence the urgency to site another elementary school as soon as possible.

Throughout the state of Virginia and in every other state there are schools built in rural areas, often on their own private utilities and surrounded by either grazing cattle or growing vegetables. In Loudoun, we should have disallowed all residential building in western Loudoun if we were going to refuse to build schools for the children. We can't pay Maryland tuition to educate our students living in northwest Loudoun; they are our RESPONSIBILITY and they must have classrooms somewhere near where they live. If we can't build on dirt roads (Grubb property); if we can't use private utilities; if we can't be within reach of a farm; if we can't build in Lovettsville because the streets are too narrow for buses; if all the property we are able to use are owned by developers or farmers who are not willing to sell, we are in deep deep trouble. The school board is advised to plan ahead and then when we do, we are criticized for either paying too much money or putting the schools in the wrong place.

The families who do have children affected by this decision are writing. But there are children who are not even born yet who will need the kindergarten classrooms to be built there in six years. The majority of those who are protesting do not have children in the school system; are told that this property is farm property which it is not and has not been for three years; are told that we will be using 72,000 gallons when the real figure is more like 17,313; are told that this spells the end for farm businesses nearby when that is not the case (they have their own access to their property, their own wells and their own customer base). Just look to Tysons Corner where houses abut the truck farm that is still doing business on Route 7. We will not be polluting the soil or water and we must prove no disturbance of water resources in the immediate area way before we build.

Both boards have treaded softly on condemnation and rightfully so which makes us even more anxious that if we do not secure property now, the only land left will have homes or businesses on it or will have an unwilling seller. The only way to avoid condemnation is to seek a willing seller (which we have) and purchase property before it has people living on it or businesses in operation (which we have).

I ask you to think of the kindergartner I referred to above; he is counting on all of us to think of his future and the future of his friends.

Priscilla Godfrey

Piggy Panic

I received a text from my wife today:

[Middle School Daughter] has come home with the most amazing rumors about swine flu that I have EVER heard. "LCPS will take the healthy kids and put them in an overnight school and do tests and bloodwork on them and stuff. It will be awesome!" They sent home a flyer today. She said some kids were wearing surgical masks. She is so excited.

Deep breath.

First, facts and helpful information being distributed by LCPS:

LCPS Home page Information on Swine Flu and How to Prevent it.

LCPS Student Health Services Website:

• Do you know the difference between seasonal flu, swine flu, avian flu, and pandemic flu?
• Swine Influenza and You
• Talking to Children about Swine Flu (PDF)
  

The Loudoun Times Mirror carried Dr. Hatrick's Statement about Swine Flu

All students should have come home today with letters about swine flu (and in Spanish).

All of this should have the effect of making everyone well informed and assured that LCPS is well aware of the situation and is well prepared in the event of a local outbreak.

With that said, I came across an interesting factoid. The CDC estimated in 2003 that 36,000 people die in the US each year from flu-related complications. That's 36,000 every year. And yet somehow, no surgical masks at school in those other years.

Please don't panic your kids.