update:meeting will be held at Piney Branch Elementary School on Thursday evening at 7:00 pm
Lets rewind, back to 2006, to a little ole, 7,000 thousand home development called Brentswood in the Gainesville/Brentsville District. If I close my eyes, I can still see this amazing convergence of Republicans and Democrats coming out, officially, to oppose the first incarnation of Brentswood. Who was at the forefront leading the charge to oppose THAT massive rezoning? Well, my dear friend, Corey Stewart, who, at the time, was only an Occoquan Supervisor, not the big powerful Chairman that he is today.
Get ready people, October 9th might be go time!
Citizens knew that Wally Covington was making promises during his close primary with Jeanine Lawson. One of them was to the residents of Victory Lakes. What was the promise you may be asking? A new high school. Who cares if you have to screw an entire county to get it, a promise made is a promise kept during election season!
The 864 acres in question is zoned for both FEC and SRL (flexible employment use and Suburban Residential Low). Almost 100 acres is protected under an environmental resource designation. Now, since we don’t have to an ACTUAL comprehensive plan amendment, how are citizens suppose to comment?
Hmmm, I wonder, and I am sure I am simply being paranoid that maybe the developer and certain developer friendly supervisors INTEND for citizens to remain in the dark, ensuring our inablility to counter, what is sure to be a monstrosity of a housing development!
Here is what I do know from an article in the Bull Run Observer, dated July 20, 2012. There was a small, not properly publicized meeting with County Staff and the Developer, that reached out to residents closest to the proposed development. Only written submitted questions were allowed, no questions from the audience was allowed. Seriously, tax payers are forbiddent ask questions aloud?
Apparently Wally Covington, in an e-mail said he wants a high school site to be a “priorit in the overall plan for the area”. I bet, he needs to make sure he follows through on promises, mostly to developers I imagine!
People of PWC better beware, this sounds like a real tax killer. I hope the BOCS remembers that too many of their constituents are underwater, trapped in homes that they cannot sell what they bought their homes for a mere few years ago. We have homes still going into forclosure. We have over 30 thousand homes approved that have yet to be built. Simple eoncomics here, supply/demand. Shouldn’t this BOCS be concerned about the residents who already live here? We have plenty of supply, but not enough demand!
Our infrastructure may FINALLY be catching up, schools, roads, libraries, parks, and fire/rescue. I hope the BOCS makes it clear that their job is to protect the investment and quality of life of PWC residents first and foremost.
Stay tuned folks, I will be sure to stay on top of this one. As soon as the CPA is public, citizens will be sure to go through it was a fine tooth comb!
Elena – you, Moon and I might have different views on the Presidential race, but I’m with you 100% on this.
Watch for some really sleazy tactics next month. Brentswood was never acted upon. It was merely deferred in 2006. Also, according to County rules, if you reduce the size of a CPA/Rezoning application, you do not need to start at square one with public hearings and all that other burdensome stuff of transparency and good government. Stone Haven (the development to which you refer in your article) consists of the area that was to be Brentswood back in 2006 south of Wellington Road. That was the largest parcel. It excludes the parcel that was part of the Brentswood proposal north of Wellington Road. No land that was not included in Brentswood is included in Stone Haven.
Bottom line – as I read the process and the requirements, Wally, Corey and Marty could railroad through approval of the Stone Haven CPA and rezoning on October 9 with no further input from citizens. Wally and Corey probably see this as their last term on the BOCS so they have nothing to lose. Marty is too indebted to the developers not to support it if Wally and Corey can’t get three more votes from other supervisors.
“As soon as the CPA is public, citizens will be sure to go through it was a fine tooth comb!”
If you still have your copy of the Brentswood CPA from 2006, you may already have the Stone Haven CPA. As I wrote, they do not need to start from sratch on this. Technically, they approve the whole thing on October 9 with not one more word from citizens said.
“Our infrastructure may FINALLY be catching up, schools, roads, libraries, parks, and fire/rescue.”
We have the most crowded schools and underpaid teachers in the region. Anyone tried to drive the Rt. 234 Bypass through the Coles and Brentswood districts at rush hour? Hint: don’t call it rush.
Stone Haven is keeping in step with our BOCS tradition of having developers finance their campaign, lying to the voters, and pulling off sleazy, backroom deals. We and our kids pay the price for the corruption and developer profits.
I remember the local talk radio guy in 2006 checking out a sudden approval for 5000 homes in Chesterfield. His thoughts were….if they’re needed…fine.
He was shocked that there was already approval for 25 THOUSAND homes.
So, your problems are common. I don’t think that those homes ever got built.
I am confused NTK. Stone Haven is almost one thousand acres. There must be new parcels that make up this land. How can they get a CPA through if not all the land has been through the process and “studied” ?
Further to this end: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-state-of-nova an article about the tri-county parkway. I don’t know what the consensus is on this road but closing the roads through the battlefield is likely to result in some angry residents….
Maybe Mom and others who know something about this will chime in also. From a strict legalistic perspective, it has already been studied. Staff did that back in 2006 when it was called Brentswood. They published the staff reports and held the public hearing. Stone Haven is the area south of Wellington Road that was part of Brentswood. The BOCS did not vote yea or nay on Brentswood, they just deferred it when Wally and Sean did not see the votes there to approve it. It doesn’t matter that both the Planning Commission and staff opposed Brentswood. They could vote to amend the proposal and approve Stone Haven as just the area south of Wellington Road. That’s my understanding of how the process works. Mom???? Do you agree?
If that’s true, they’ll be able to railroad the entire thing through on October 6. That depends of course on getting five votes. Would two other supervisors be willing to join Stewart, Covington and Nohe? Jenkins – probably. Caddigan, May and Principi may not if they think it’s being watched closely by the public. This will be a majot test for Candland. He took some developer money during the campaign, albeit not as much as many of the others, and I’m willing to cut him some slack and grant that as a new candidate he didn’t realize the implications of doing that. He knows the score now, and his vote on Stone Haven will be a major test of his resolve to serve the taxpayers instead of the special interests.
On October 9 Stone Haven has four secure votes – Stewart, Covington, Nohe and Jenkins. Will one of the other four be the fifth to pass it?
@Need to Know
Not much time today but NO, this is not the same CPA, this is a new one that the BOCS addressed in the spring and authorized for a larger study area to be undertaken. Chris Pierce better not play legal and procedural games with this one because I can guarantee that before it gets to a vote there will be more than one filing for an injunction in the Circuit Court. The Brentswood Plan is technically (and likely legally) dead as so much time has passed without county action. One could realistically argue that under the ordinances, it died years ago. I know a certain law firm that would disagree but that is a battle for another day, no land is vested in anything at this time.
I’m thinking we’re ALL on board with you, Elena on this issue. There WAS a blue moon recently.
All right, I found a few minutes to look into this a little further.
On March 20, 2012 the BOCS passed a resolution to NOT initiate CPA PLN2012-000224, STONEHAVEN. Thus the original CPA is DEAD and given the period of time that has passed should not be open for reconsideration by those that voted in favor of killing it. The motion includes a directive to initiate a study of the area with alternatives to be presented to the BOCS but that is not the same as a CPA application.
Thus in order for any CPA to legally proceed, under County Rules a CPA application must be forwarded to the BOCS for initiation. If the initiated, the CPA has to then go to the Planning Commission (with a public hearing requirement), then forwarded, with the Commission’s recommendation, to the Board of County Supervisors (with a public hearing requirement) for final action. They CAN NOT JUST APPROVE a CPA at the October meeting. It would violate county rules/policy and be a violation of § 15.2-2229 (not that such circumstances seem to bother the BOCS). I hope Angela is boning up on her land-use law and not merely relying on the advice of certain private counsel because this could be a real rough ride.
Moon: From your post, “Citizens knew that Wally Covington was making promises during his close primary with Jeanine Lawson. One of them was to the residents of Victory Lakes. What was the promise you may be asking? A new high school. Who cares if you have to screw an entire county to get it, a promise made is a promise kept during election season!”
I respect your thoughts but am very concerned about the above statement. What Victory Lakes (VL) residents were promised a high school? Owning a home in this community I can assure you that residents have been promised many things in the past, none of which were ever kept, but such a “promise” would be news to me. I am friends with the HOA vice president, she is unaware of the “promise”. I attend meetings regularly and am very active in my community but I missed this “promise”. I was unaware that VL would support an entire “massive” development for one high school at the complete detriment of PWC. I ask you what does this community have to do with this development? The answer is NOTHING. Frankly, your reference about VL being willing to “screw an entire county to get it” is offensive to me, but possibly I am too sensitive.
As one of the spokespersons for OurSchools and a property owner in Victory Lakes I do support a new high school. Do not confuse that with blind support of a “massive” development, in fact I do not have a set opinion on this development yet. I am waiting for the facts and recommendations to be presented. When my support is given or not given, it will be my support as an individual, not a representative for my community or an endorsement by OurSchools.
If you are able to attend the meeting tonight I hope you will introduce yourself to me.
Now on the new high school site. We need one, this I know we can easily agree on. PWCS has the money in carryover funds and reserves, why have they not purchased a site? Could it be that they are awaiting the proffering of land at Stone Haven? (That is the new name of Brentswood.) PWCS intends to build a new high school on the west side of the county and plans for it to open in 2019. My opinion: we need it sooner.
While at Piney Branch, I spoke with Dave Beavers, PWCS, he seems to see a site at Stone Haven as potentially suitable for a high school. Mr. Beavers projects a high school site to cost approximately 10 million dollars and I believe PWCS is inclined to take the proffer if it is offered. Are you aware that the land purchased for Piney Branch was sold by this very same Brentswood developer? The land off Devlin Road was also purchased from them. I wonder if PWCS ever actively attempted to buy land for a high school from the developer/landowner because history does show that Brentswood was NOT opposed to selling land for elementary schools. What is the hold up? Why has PWCS started to look at the site for the next school after the west side school? They totally skipped over the west side site accusation. That makes me wonder if they secretly support this development far more then any individual in VL ever could.
I have met with Wally Covington, he opening revealed that he would like to see a high school at Stone Haven if the development were approved. My thoughts, it is an ideal site, we need the school, why not there since apparently PWCS is waiting for someone to hand them the land anyway.
I spoke with the property developers who also supports a high school on the site. I asked them directly if they would consider building the roads and infrastructure to the site before any homes were occupied, the answer was yes. BTW I asked the developer the question while I was attending the first meeting at Piney Branch, and I was not escorted out of the building for not writing it down.
As far as Stone Haven being hidden from the county, Our Schools shares your desire to made information easy to find so that everyone can be well informed. Links about Stone Haven have been posted on OurSchools facebook page several times this summer. Also check the county’s website for all the details http://www.pwcgov.org/government/dept/planning/Pages/Special-Planning-Projects.aspx
I check your page almost daily and always find it interesting and useful. Thank you for such a wonderful blog. Let the sun shine in, it is about time:)
This one is from Elena. If you look up top, right under the title, it will tell you the author so you know which one of us to come after. This time it is Elena. I will direct your concerns to her.
I am not very well versed on land issue situations. I can speak generically but specifics…not so much.
Moon —–> Our Schools
I was asked through Our Schools Facebook page to post this here for you to read. Seems your references to Wally making promises has fired up some people. Truly I know nothing about Mrs. Lawson’s potential misleading, in fact, I did vote for her in the last election:D Still I do question what we will do with more FEC, I do not see empty FEC space as good for our community. When reading below, REMEMBER THIS IS NOT FROM ME! Don’t shoot the messenger.
‘It is puzzling to me how quick you are to judge Wally Covington and falsely accuse him of making promises to Victory Lakes, or any other community for that matter, about a new school. Perhaps you should change your focus to the fact that Jeanine Lawson continues to mislead her neighbors and hopeful constituency about the need for Flexible Employment Centers. It is obvious that neither she nor you have done your due diligence to research and inform your/her followers of the fact that 12% of FEC space currently sits vacant in our area. Your “Build it and they will come” mentality not only does not hold water, but it would leave the community treading water to try to find a viable occupant for that space. The school is needed! The School Board ought to be more proactive in procuring the space where the schools are needed and the surrounding neighborhoods should be welcoming a well-planned community over vacant warehouses.’
Our schools,
I am not the author of this thread. Elena is. This article is outside my realm of knowledge.
I would tell the person on facebook to come here themselves if they have something to say. It sounds like they are putting you in the middle of some bruhaha between Wally and Jeanine.
I am not getting in this squabble but I should warn you, Elena has been a community activist on land use as it relates to best practice and open spaces for at least 11 years. If Elena doesn’t know the answer, she knows where to go to find out the answer.
Moon
@Moon-howler
Agreed:D
@Our Schools
The concern that many of us have is that Wally makes numerous promises to make it appear that the projects he schemes up with the developers have broad public support. That is not the case. For example, Avendale. That was a completely residential development (hugely tax negative) but Wally made some strategic promises, such as to the Grizzlies football club and citizens wanting a school, to get them to come out in support of what he and the developers had concocted. He made a big deal of the developer’s promise to realign Vint Hill Road, even though such a realignment was no longer needed, and even if it were would have been far cheaper for the County to do it.
Wally is up to his same old tricks again. Stone Haven is a massive residential development that will make congestion on the roads and overcrowding in the schools far worse than they are now, even if another school is built at Stone Haven. The landowner even wants taxpayers to fund the road that will provide access to their property once developed. The negative tax impact will be enormous also. The only winners will be Wally and his developer chums, who will make out like bandits at our expense.
I suggest that next time you want to criticize someone on development issues, you learn some local history. Jeanine, Moon and Elena are all on the taxpayers’ side on these issues. Your attacks would be far better directed elsewhere, such as at Wally and the developers who take the money and get out of town, leaving us to pay for the mess they make.
By the way, check out Wally’s developer funding and then tell me whose side you think he’s on:
http://www.vpap.org/candidates/profile/money_in_industry1/10212?start_year=2003&end_year=2012&lookup_type=year&filing_period=all
@NTK,
I should probably highlight in red that OurSchools is carrying a message.
I misread that at first also.
@Moon-howler
Thanks Moon for replying. I do hope that my post made it clear that I and my neighbors are not lap dogs for a developer. It is the reference about VL that I found disturbing, not the opposition or support of Stone Haven.
@Need to Know
Slow down Need to Know. AS I said, I voted for Jeanine, I shared that post at another’s request because they were not as clever as you or I with the the fake names.
Who did I, Our Schools criticize?
By the way, I am quite the history buff:D
If you want local history, see Steve Randolph or Lafayette. I know some but not like these guys.
@Moon-howler
I guess I should really be redirecting this to Elena, but just indulge me this one last time.
I am sure Elena knows far more then I do, I am a beginner and am quick to say that I am very often wrong. I would love to talk with her and learn more. Again, my decision on this development will be personal, not political or broadcasted through Our Schools. I do not lead VL in any of my decisions. As of today, I neither support or oppose this development. I speak for no one but myself on this matter (with the exception of that shared post, which was probably a mistake). I do ask that Elena not imply that my neighborhood is backing a developer because of some unheard of promise from Mr. Covington. VL is played as the bad guy far too often, you have to know the history to understand why this hits a funny bone for us. Quite frankly most that live here are too tired and too busy to even know what you are talking about. This neighborhood is not united on this or even involved and sadly has absolutely no influence over our local politician anyway. Never have and probably, we never will. So why drag us into it.
you are indulged. Half of what you said went over my head…but…I listened.
I am sure Elena will be glad to talk with you. She might even recruit you.
As for me, I am the village idiot as far as land use goes.
Moon
@Our Schools
No offense meant. I read your statement about Jeanine making misleading statements and it sent up red flares. She spends a great deal of her time trying to correct the BS Wally spreads around. She’s a honest lady working to improve the community with no hidden agendas, as have many of the supervisors.
In any event, let’s all get off to a good start and you’re welcome to join us in the resistance!
It was a series of miscommunications. It was thought that I wrote the thread. Then you and I both thought OurSchools was the speaker rather than the messenger.
Welcome OurSchools,
Call me jaded, but too many times citizens have been used to pass bad development projects. It’s such an old strategy its almost becoming new again. The people who pay for over developement are all of us, even if you think you are getting a benefit, in the end, you to will get the short end of the deal. Ask about Battlefield, its so beyond capapcity, its ridiculous. Schools open and within a few years they are over crowded. The word “planning” in PWC is ficticious in my opinion.
First, Stone Haven is a reincarnation of Brentwood, a large residential proposal that was presented back in early 2007. Corey Stewart ran on a smart growth platform and was vehemently opposed to that project. I imagine, given his new and improved status of wanna be LG, his position has radically changed.
In a county where real estate values are in the toilet, the last thing you would want to do is approve thousand of more homes in one targeted area. How does that help that people who are under water? It won’t, simple economics, supply/demand. People, realisitically, will not see their homes return to the precipice where their homes were way over valued, but certainly, this county, given its ability to control growth, should as least, put in policy that will help as opposed to hurt, their constituents.
Our Schools, all Wally and Corey need is the president of your HOA to put their stamp of approval on the proposal and they will “take that to the bank” as proof the residents in PWC back the application by the developer. It doesn’t work in reverse though, when residents speak out against a project, we almost always ignored, no matter how in depth the reasons or how organized the group. Once an application makes it to the BOCS for an up or down vote, denial is virtually impossible. In fact, in the decade I have been involved in land use here, only one project was a denied, Greater South Market. And why was it denied, it was an election year. THAT was the last time, and it was the year 2003.
I apologize if I unintentionally impugned the entirety of Victory Lakes, that was certainly not my intent. In fact, if I inadvertantly fell into the Developer trap of pitting neighbor against one another, for that, I am sorry. Truly, it is Wally that doesn’t care about screwing an entire county to get what he wants, not the people in Victory Lakes.
I was unable to make the meeting tonight, I did contact a reporter in hopes he was covering the meeting.
I just wanted to clarify one point – PWCS can neither accept nor reject land that is proffered for school sites. Representatives of the school division can and do report to the BOCS on the extent of overcrowding in areas where development is proposed, but they have no authority beyond that. Any land that is proffered will be accepted, whether the school division thinks the sites are suitable or not (like in Avendale).
I am a complete novice when it comes to land use, and, to be honest, really hate it. I am, however, a CPA, and I like numbers.
The major reason we deal with such excessive overcrowding in our schools and have the largest class sizes in the area is financial. Our county and school division simply do not have the financial resources to build the schools we need as we need them. Part of that is due to our tax base – while we are a well off county compared with the rest of the nation, we fall behind Loudoun, Fairfax, and Stafford when it comes to per capita and median household incomes, but the cost of living here is the same as it is in those counties. There’s not really much we can do about that until the economy starts improving and PWC figures out how to attract businesses to the county.
The other part of that is our proffers – the money we demand from developers to cover the cost of providing services up front for their development. The money that is proffered by developers for building houses in PWC is the lowest in the region. We’re lower than Loudoun. We’re lower than Fairfax. We’re lower than Stafford. We’re lower than Fauquier. And not just a little lower, we’re lower by thousands of dollars per single family home. Loudoun and Fairfax I could understand, but to be lower than both Fauquier and Stafford as well – and lower by the thousands? That’s mind blowing!
Because our proffers are so low and don’t cover the cost of building new schools or roads or providing police, fire, and rescue services, every time a new home gets built, our property taxes go up. If the BOCS really wants to demonstrate that they have the best interests of the current taxpaying and voting citizens of PWC in hand, they’ll increase developer proffers to more accurately reflect regional norms and actual infrastructure costs BEFORE they consider approving any new housing developments.
@Elena
Thank you ELena for your reply and the welcome:) I appreciate that you clarification in regards to VL, it means a great deal to me.
KimS,
The proffers “sit” where they are because of a Republican mind set, period. Let me parphrase “we are protecting the homebuyer because if we raise the proffer requirement, the burden will be passed on to the homeowner”.
I can run circles around why that is BS. We ALL end up paying to build the infrastructure for new development. So how exactly is the BOCS “protecting” the taxpayer?
For a county STILL struggling through the bursting of the housing market bubble, this proposal makes no sense, zippie, nada, zero. Here is the problem with proffering a school site. The new school will NOT address the current overcrowding, it will accomodate the old student, NOT the multitude of new students that will be filling those homes. We need the BOCS and the School Board to stop begging for land, taking crumbs from developers, and buy a piece of land with taxpayer support to SAVE PWC money in the long run.
Avendale was a joke. What would have only been 25 homes is now going to be 500. They proffered a school site that the school board didn’t want! Where are all those kids going to go to school when the homes are built? Infrastructure is more than an asphault road, its schools, its parks, its libraries, its hosptials, fire/rescue, etc.
No, Stone Haven is a disaster and every resident should shout NO from the top of their lungs.
Like KimS I am somewhat niave to land use issues but, again like KimS, I am well versed in school issues. I can’t give the school division a pass on this one. If there are communities and individuals that will back this development because of the desparate need for a high school, I have to ask why PWCS is not nipping this in the butt. If PWCS is truly opposed to this development and wants its citizens to believe a high school is coming sooner then later, then they need to purchase the land for the the 13th HS immediately. If land were already obtained PWCS could announce that they do not need OR WANT the proffer for a high school and NOBODY could then use a proffered high school school site as a golden apple on a string.
PWCS did purchase the 100 acres at Hoadly and PWC Parkway (for the 12th HS) in 2006, so they are capable of making such buys. Six years after buying that site, the purchase of the 13th HS site has not been announced and it appears that potential sites are not being seriously evaluated. Does this make you pause? If you add this to the general assumption that land will only go up in value and cost the taxpayers more in the future you have to move on to the next set of logical questions.
– Why is the next new high school being built at Hoadly Road and not on the west side of this county?
– Why is the School Board looking at the land for the 14th high school but not for the 13th HS (the west side one)?
-Why is the build date for the west side school not being moved up?
-What are our school administrators and School Board Members waiting for?
I keep coming back to only one potential answer; they must be waiting for the proffered land at Stone Haven. What else makes sense?
Proffers are not forced on the schools, the schools go through a process to have the land released to them. Sure they will accept it and we know the BOCS will release it to them eventually, but they are not required to take the “free” land. In fact, “free” land is never really free and is often very costly when located poorly.
The school division is not pro-actively planning. Patriot will be 1000 students over capacity in 2016. That is 4 years after being built. Patriot is above capacity TODAY, this is its second year in operation and its first senior class. That future projection is BEFORE one new home is built, therefore you should bank on it be off. I do not call that catching up, I call it not planning ahead. I call it unacceptable.
Here is where I have to ask, what’s wrong with Stonewall Jackson? Is it that overcrowded?
REading between the lines, not from you but letters to the editor, etc, it would appear that there might be a desire to get away from the negative elements at Stonewall.
You have made my point “our school”, exactly, build a school and its over capacity. Stone Haven would be horrible for the quality of life in this county, you are so right, there is no planning and Stone Haven is the perfect representation!
Now how do we assist PWC Schools in moving forward with that needed land purchase for the 13th HS site? The time to buy is now. After that we could lend our combined positive energies towards moving up construction on the school division’s CIP. The need is here today, it is not going away, so lets get it built. I am always interested in making new friends and learning more about PWC. Thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts here. I do love your blog. Together citizens can and do make a difference.
PWCS needs to buy the land for the 13th High School AND needs to flip the build dates between the 12th and 13th High Schools.
The 12th High school is only being built to house students from the old Harbor Station development, which fell through, was thought to be dead, and has now come back under a new name. With the addition currently under construction at Potomac High School set to open in 2 years, there won’t be sufficient enrollment in the schools in and around the site of the 12th High School to fill it even to 30% of capacity, unless Harbor Station kicks off, builds out, and sells out faster than developments sold out during the housing boom. Common sense tells me that’s not going to happen, so the school division will have to be very creative in drawing their boundaries to fill the 12th high school (and by creative I mean long bus rides down country roads).
Meanwhile Patriot and Battlefield will be so overcapacity by 2016 that they could fill a new high school to 90% of capacity with current enrollment. Unfortunately, the homes that feed Battlefield and Patriot are no where near the site of the 12th high school, unless the school division wants to bus kids who can walk to school more than 45 minutes one way to the 12th high school. Rather than built a $100 million high school to house students who don’t live here as their houses haven’t been built yet while kids on the other end of the county who already live here struggle at schools at 150% of capacity, what we really need is for the construction of the 12th and 13th high schools to be flipped. That’s what makes the most logical sense.
And yes, I suspect the school division is waiting to find out if they’ll be proffered land in Stone Haven / Brentswood before they shell out $10 million for land for a high school.
As for the use of the Brentswood land, I really don’t understand why the current comprehensive plan has to be changed. My understanding from the first meeting is that the plot of land is currently in the comprehensive plan with roughly 1200 homes, land for employment centers, and some land set aside for environmental reasons. We can’t change the environmental land, so the issue seems to be whether the land designated for employment centers should be switched to houses – which would then bump the development from 1200 to 2000+ homes.
Call me stupid, but why does the comprehensive plan have to be changed? FEC land doesn’t cost county residents anything. Until it’s built, it just sits there as unused land. It doesn’t need schools, roads, police, libraries, or parkland. Once it’s built all it needs is roads and police and rescue services – which are a lot less expensive than schools. Houses need roads, schools, parks, libraries, and rescue service.
So why not leave the designation as it is with 1200 houses and some FEC land? The school division can still get land for a school, either from a developer who wants to build those 1200 homes or by buying it themselves. With the economy as bad as it is, building and selling 1200 homes is just as unlikely as building and selling 2000 homes. So why change the designation now?
Stonewall Jackson will also be overcrowded in 2015, the population will then probably shift over the new school at Hoadly in 2016. Family from Battlefield and Patriot will likely need to be shifted to SJ (that is only logic speaking).
Academically, Stonewall Jackson had the lowest SOL scores in PWC this year. Dropout rates are among the highest in the county. Parents do want the best for their children and these types of statistics do not give the that warm and fuzzy feeling.
The number of college bound students at SJ are lower then the surrounding PWC schools, yet CTE programs have not been made a priority at this school. Really it is not much of a priority at any school in PWC, but a population that is not college bound should have other great and well funded opportunities.
Funding for economically disadvantaged students and ESOL students are constantly on the cutting block and SJ has a significantly higher population of these two groups then OP, Patriot, Battlefield and Brentsville. This does indicate that SJ would have felt the hard times much more then the other schools I just mentioned. The school division needs to start showing SJ some love. It needs greater funding because SJ is facing greater challenges with a higher risk population. It is the future of these students thatv we should be investing in, the opportunity is now.
@Moon-howler
The community needs to start showing SJHS some love it sounds like to me. How far they fall. In 2001, SJHS was selected as High School of the year…nationally.
What is really needed in Prince William County is balance. Of course you are going to have low overall test scores if all the muckety mucks head on out to their new elite schoos with exercise machines in the library.
Check out Stonewall Middle compared to the new shiny Reagan Middle on the lake. Let me guess which one will have the best test scores?
Prince William County needs to do a little shuffling around and see that some of these older neighorhoods, especially those heavy immigrant demographics, get spread around a little.
I am curious what school those living in Victory Lakes were told their kids would go to when they bought their homes? Why do I think they were slated for Stonewall Jackson High School?
Maybe i should start saber rattling for my grand children. Maybe we should demand a new school. I had 3 kids graduate from Stonewall Jackson High School and I have a grandaughter there now. I live at the poor end of Sudley Manor Drive. I am probably the trash you all out there in God’s country want to get away from.
Parents who really want to improve schools work to improve the schools they have. Those who want to be elitists just do the flight thing. Actually, I do understand wanting your kid to go to good schools with good teachers in a safe learning environment. There is absolutely no reason SJHS can’t fit that paradigm. If it isn’t, then we should all demand to meet with the principal, Dr. Walts who I know doesn’t meet with or talk to parents and the school board to demand that the resources be poured into SJHS.
Do those ESOL students need more time, after school tutoring, or other community resources to get their test scores up? I am not ready to write them off.
UPDATE: SJHS doesn’t have the lowest SOL scores.
The schools should purchase a site for the 13th high school. That would take out that part of the decision on Stonehaven. The schools have no control over if they get land proffers or cash proffers. The BOCS that makes that decision. The schools can say that this potential proffered land is a bad location as they did with Avendale and the BOCS says we don’t care and the result is the schools are stuck with it.
Just think how easier this would all be if Supervisors Covington and Stewart had listened to the schools when they said they did not like the Avendale location. That developer could have instead proffered that acreage somewhere else and we might already have a 13th high school site.
As far as the 14th land, that site has been in talks for years and way before the land for the 11th or 12th was even purchased. That site was picked out by the county for a high school way back when when they built McCoart. They’ve just put it off for years because there were other areas with more pressing needs. Years ago it used to be mentioned as the 8th or 9th high school site. The original deal was McCoart, Government Services a Fire Station, Police Substation and the High School. The rest of that plan just hasn’t come to fruition yet.
@Moon-howler
Moon,
If by negative elements you mean to ask if parents would prefer to remove their children from what appears to be an underperforming school, then I suppose the answer would be yes for most parents. Would you not want the same for children?
It seems like a natural reaction for an involved parent (and often obsessive one) to want to give their children the very best opportunities for success. Parents worry constantly, they look at numbers and they make the best decision they know how to make. Sometimes they are wrong, sometimes right. But they can’t do it twice, they have only one shot with that child. So they do make decisions, it is their child’s future they are concerned about.
Isn’t that why people purchase our homes where we do? Aren’t we looking for the best we can provide our families?
Aren’t we all somewhat obsessed with the investment we put into our children and all our future citizens as a matter of fact.
NOW, isn’t that why we blog? For the betterment of future generations, right? What could be more important than the students of PWC?
Great points anonamouse! It is clear the western end needs a new school, NOW, and allowing a huge development to cure an overcrowded school problem flies in the face of common sense!
Our School,
I was always amazed at Tom Davis, a republican representative put his kids in one of the most diverse schools in fairfax county, glasgow middle and Jeb stuart high school. He made it clear that investing in schools was the solution! both schools had an IB program, in fact, glasgow was the first middle school to implement that program. Those kids learned more than just their math facts and grammar, they were in a mini U.N and it was fabulous.
@Elena
Congressman Bill Young also put his children in public school in Woodbridge. Rep. Young has the distinction of being the longest serving congressman in the House of Representatives.
It sure wasn’t one of the new spiffy schools. Also the Thurgood Marshall family thought the school good enough for Thurgood Marshall’s granddaughter. This was a diverse school also.
I commend both Tom Davis and Bill Young on their decisions to do what they felt was best for their families. That is a parent’s right and responsibility. At the same time I would never condemn a Battlefield student for choosing the IB program at SJ, or the Garfield student for choosing the performing arts program at Woodbridge or the SJ student for choosing the Cambridge program at Brentsville District HS. This is what this school division offers and people do seem to like the options and the ability to choice.
Lets stop building the “spiffy” schools and build the schools with the number of seats our county needs, not with an indoor pool and dance studio like the ones planned at the Hoadly Road High School. What is wrong with a school just like Battlefield? Why did the price increase so dramatically with Patriot and why is the next school going to cost approximately 1 million dollars to build? This does not include the cost of the land and is about 20 million more then Patriot cost. Think about these numbers and the debt we are accumulating. I understand what Tom Davis meant, but I contend that investing in schools is NOT the solution, investing in our students and their education is.
Those are good questions. On the other hand, this county seems to go for cheap. Look at the number of dumbell schools there are. There must be 15-20 of those idiot plans that must have been divised for California schools. Then there was the Stonewall/OP/Garfield/ plan. wall-less. doh!!! That was on the cheap. Then there was Beville/Saunders …blah blah blah plan. Then there was the Antiedam/Mullin plan.
Prince William County has been known for adopting bad plans on the cheap and not changing. Whoever thought of wall-less classrooms had you know what for brains!
The county also needs to stop taking trash land as proffer land. It takes a lot of time and patience to learn all this stuff like you are doing. I don’t know the inside stuff like you do, just what I have seen and experienced.
Shame on PWC for not planning for the future better. While we are on the subject, how does a school go from #1 in the nation (I would say that was a bit exaggerated) to being the scourage of the county everyone is running from? It makes no sense to me. My last kid finished in 1995 so I really don’t have a dog in this fight other than by reputation.
@Moon-howler
Moon,
Stonewall was one of the tops schools in the country when VL was starting out. I am sure many parents were thrilled to know their kids would go there. Dominion Valley, Piedmont and Braemar all attended Stonewall at that time. Many later folks were told they would attend a new high school. My kids were young, I never asked.
I am sorry if I have offended you in anyway, I can assure you that I do not consider you or anyone else in your area or any other area to be trash that I need to get away from. Not knowing me you may have made assumptions, but on this one you would be very wrong.
It is not me that is not supporting SJ, it is PWC Schools. Why are there no exercise bikes in the library at SJ? Beside the fact that no one needs them, this county does not care about SJ and would never think to give you one. Piney Branch has them too. Must be that the school division thinks kids are smarter if they have a bike to ride in the library, right? The county invested in the beautification of Patriot HS and then bragged about the architectural design awards received by Moseley Architects. I think Patriot is a disgrace, it is too overdone and it was too expensive. And it will soon be surrounded by trailers. My tax dollar will pay for that school and its turf fields for the next 20 years, so will yours. I would have much preferred to pour that money into the schools that needed the extra love because the success of these students is what I care about.
The success of this county depend on what we can do for those have the greatest needs, not by those that were born with everything they needed and more. We need strong CTE programs, increased funding for ESOL, SPED and economically disadvantaged students. We need solutions, we need some LOVE!
Peace out:D
FYI: Stonewall did indeed have the overall lowest SOL test scores in PWC. I NEVER make up numbers and I have all the links to prove them. They are published facts and were reported by VDOE. Do you have something that says different? Do the research, I take no joy in reporting the facts on this one.
You didn’t offend me at all. However, I have read the newspapers and the opinions of some of the VL people screams out loud and clear. Part of me doesn’t blame them. the other part…well..I have to say I live right in the heart of the problem. If I had school age kids, I would be part of the problem.
I think that the county is going to have to make sure that lesser income neighborhoods don’t all cluster into the same schools. Its great to have these new schools. This area hadnt had a new high school in 30 years before Battlefield was built. All the new ones ended up over in the Woodbridge area.
Seriously now, What does the county think is going to happen? Years ago they started the mini magnet schools. Let’s see, Beville is an IB center. Parkside was foreign Language, SJMS was an IB center, so on and so forth. Those programs pulled in kids who wouldn’t have gone there anyway. I have had people look me in the eye and tell me that is NOT why the specialty school concept wasn’t started. Bull pucky. Of course it was.
The county needs to come up with new and improved ideas about sharing the wealth rather than taking the lazy man’s way out. I have watched good people be purged from some of these schools (administrators) because of test scores. Give me a break. These people aren’t miracle workers. Seriously, I don’t blame Victory Lakes folks for wanting to pull their kids out. They have spent their bucks and friends a mile or so down the road get to go to the modern, spiffy school where there weren’t some of the problems one finds at SJHS. I can wear both hats, I fear.
But you didn’t do it. Sorry I directed my frustration at you. I barely have a dog in the fight.
We will talk.
Moon
@Moon-howler
Moon,
I would be very honored to stand beside you and fight for Stonewall Jackson and Ellis and Mullin and Garfield and Parkside and all the other schools needing the LOVE. This is very much what needs to happen. I am ready. You know my real name I emailed it to you a month ago. Call me sometime and lets have coffee. I really want to part of something good, something that matters. This is it for me. Put me to work, what do you need?
OS
Unfortunately, SJHS doesn’t have the lowest SOL scores in PWC. They battle with Gar-Field and Freedom for that honor, depending on the subject.
The thing is though, that hasn’t changed much in the last 10 – 12 years. Even in 2001 when they were voted School of the Year by whatever magazine that was, SJHS didn’t have the highest SOL scores in PWC. They were just like they are now – competing with Gar-Field and Freedom for the lowest scores on those assessments in the county. They generally did better than state averages in certain key demographic groups, but the demographic balance at the school pulled their overall totals down below state averages. (Demographic data have not been released by the VDOE for 2012 testing so we can’t look at this year’s data yet).
The thing SJHS has always done well is get kids tested – even if they aren’t going to get top spots. For the SOL everyone has to be tested, but taking the SAT, ACT, and AP exams is optional. SJHS has always worked hard to test as many students as possible because without those scores, you sure as heck aren’t going to college. The county budgets a chunk of change to help pay for testing for students who can’t afford it.
That’s why SJHS did so well in the magazine evaluations. Those evaluations don’t consider how well kids score but what percentage of eligible students actually test.
SJHS has a diverse population of students from all different walks of life. Some are college bound while others are bound for trade schools and technical fields (a journeyman plumber can make upwards of $50,000 a year at 22. A kid with a BA degree in international studies or Art History will be lucky to find a job waiting tables or tending bar). SJHS has done and continues to do a really good job pushing those all of those kids to do their best.
Stating that doesn’t mean I’m blind to the problems that we as a society clearly face. If anything, the scores in PWCS abundantly demonstrate that the poorest in our society struggle academically, at least struggle to do well on the assessments we use to gauge academic success. That achievement gap has been present since we began testing, and all the interventions and money we’ve spent really have closed the gaps much – except for girls who now generally outperform boys .
We may need to take a big step back and evaluate what we’re doing – especially at the high school and middle school level. Do we need to re-priortize some of the money we spend on college readiness for all and put it into career training. Maybe allow kids to complete some sort of technical diploma in their last 2 years of high school where they’d attend programs to learn how to be plumbers, HVAC technicians, electricians, landscape designers, computer repair stuff, or machinists. Instead of graduating with a high school diploma, they’d have a high school diploma and would be ready for apprenticeship work in those fields – which we as a nation desperately need.
I don’t know… thinking out loud I guess……
I have a case of jumping screen tonight. I have lost 2 responses already. grrrrrrr
Kim, I agree with much of what you say but I disagree with the status of SJ 12 years ago. 12 years ago Stonewall took in all of Haymarket, Bull run Mountain, Gainesville, etc. SJ was fairly balanced 12 years ago. They got their recognition from how they dealt with diversity and the accommodations and innovations they used to bridge the gap between their middle class population and their non-middle class population.
As more non-middle class students poured into the SJ boundaries, a huge chunk of middle class pulled out with the opening of Battlefield.
The consequence is well…Stonewall. But it sure isn’t the Stonewall that my kids graduated from or the Stonewall that received the recognition.
This brings us all back to land use. These types of things can and do happen when little thought or planning go into growth. Building another school just leaves another problem…and you can’t really dig yourself out of holes. the hole just gets bigger.
The school system is going to have to divide kids up a little more equitably which is going to piss off all the parents.
We are really talking about land use and class right now. Some of our supervisors will not rest every blade of grass has been turned into development. Everyone gets richer.
I am glad I don’t have a dog in this fight. It is too disgusting.
You touched on one of my theme songs. There needs to be much more vocational training in all schools. Not everyone is going to go to college, nor should they. We fail to educate the average kid.
More on that later. I have violated the topic of land use enough.
I hate putting links in comments, but you can find the latest test score data at this link.
http://pwceducationreform.wordpress.com/test-scores/
@Moon-howler
Moon,
‘You touched on one of my theme songs. There needs to be much more vocational training in all schools. Not everyone is going to go to college, nor should they. We fail to educate the average kid.’
One of my favorite songs too:)
One last post here (I understand the violation).
You always have a dog in the race!
-You are a taxpayer and you are invested in your community that was the race entry fee.
-Bonds for new schools are paid back over 20 years, this means you, your children and your grandchildren will pay these debts.
-People look at the school reports when buying homes, your home is usually your largest financial investment and for many their only retirement.
-If PWC Schools are perceived as under performing people will not choose to move here and invest here.
-Your children and your grandchildren are your largest emotional investment, they deserve the best this county can provide.
I think we all have very big dogs in this race.
And one last thing (I promise), we can never give up on a child. I can’t agree with you more. Never, ever write off a child’s potential. It is unforgivable that anyone ever would.
I guess I just don’t see SJ as under-performing. I think that is edu-speak (which is what people of the lie speak) for other problems.
The real problem is that the county has failed to balance its demographics. There is nothing wrong with SJSH that a couple of boundary changes won’t fix.
I am also looking at the SOL results. Lets take a close look. These rates are percent of students passing.
English 94%
Math 86%
History 86%
Sience 86%
So in student terms, 6 kids out of 100 didn’t pass the English SOLs. 14 out of 100 didn’t pass math. In student terms, I have seen much worse!!! Go ask City of Manassas if they would like those test scores in 7th grade math.
In real estate terms, maybe that isn’t so good. I don’t see an under performing school, frankly–at least not indicated by those scores.
Back to balanced demographics. Sticking in another massive housing development simply means the rest of us, not the developer, finance yet another school that will be at or over capacity within 3-5 years. Poor planning and padding someone’s pocket.
Once again, I will keep repeating, supporting Stone Haven makes solving these school issues MORE difficult.
“Moonlena” is right. Every single home built in Stonehaven will cost the county schools more money. It is revenue negative for the county and revenue negative for schools.
If anyone really cares about the older schools, vocational programs and disadvantaged students then they would be 100% against Stonehaven. The taxes that would come from those homes would not even begin to pay for the services consumed by those homes in roads, libaries, police, fire and especially schools. Loudoun County says the current cost per student is 3 times what a builder pays per home in PWC. That means current taxpayers have to suck up almost 66% of the cost of housing the students that would come from Stonehaven. That is at the expense of all the other capital improvements we need for current students.
How are the schools going to find the money for new innovative vocation training centers and updating and renovating older schools like Stonewall Jackson when they are going to be spending all their capital funding building new schools to house the children from those 2000 homes? the developer’s proffer will only cover 1/3 the cost of Stonehaven children alone and the rest of the bill is paid by county taxpayers. How are the schools going to fund programs and additional instructors for the disadvantaged children and vocational programs to reduce the drop out rate when they are going to be spending all that money on hiring teachers for the shiny new Stonehaven schools filled with Stonehaven students? Stonehaven makes the current situation worse.
We need to stop the madness. The only solution is to curb that type of development until current overcrowding has been handled and until PWC raises the proffers enough that the developers will be putting into the system what they are taking out.
Neighborhoods and sports teams and supervisors who come out to support these massive developments just to get their own goodies whether it be fields or schools or campaign donations should be ashamed of themselves. The rest of the county is tired of holding the bag and paying the tab.
Cheer for Anonymouse!!!! Standing ovation. Plus I like our new name. Moonelena!!!
I guess I am tired of these fly-boys breezing through here and slapping up new houses that are poorly constructed and too close together and then the rest of us getting stuck with the bill. The supervisors will trot out a few wildebest or mongoose teams to jerk at our heart strings and the rest of us chumps continue to pay the bill for new schools, roads, etc. The supervisors can walk around all puffed up being big fish in little ponds filling up the war chests.
Well, not so much with the roads. Anyone buying a house south of Bull Run should have to sign a waiver stating that they know it is going to take them 2 hours to get to work.
At what point will it stop? Would just one supervisor take care of what we already have? What about a few trees down the median strip in my neighborhood? How about some street lights where those SJHS kids have to wait for the bus in the dark at Oh-dark-hundred? What about INVESTING in 234 coming off 66 so it doesn’t look like redneck city? No one rights big campaign checks for that, do they?
Preservation of what you have should be a conservative value.
An old song should serve as a reminder.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzHK5VApBbU
Elect Anonamouse! Love the new name BTW 🙂