They can trim the fat by returning some of the new vehicles that our taxes bought. From what I can extrapolite from sightings there must be hundreds of them being used for personal use. Costco in Chantilly is not a school and not in Loudoun!

Posted by bschweiker (anonymous) on October 8, 2008 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry need more info before I can be sacastic. "Thousands of children currently aged one through five are expected to join the system in the coming years." How much money is being spent on children one-five? and how?

Mont Co. Maryland just froze thier teachers pay! They are expecting a sever cut in budget! Where do the numbers come from? Projected students next year? Hell how many students did they loose due to forclosures?

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on October 8, 2008 at 2:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Funnyguy, unless the parents move away, those kids are going to be entering the system. I.e., they are growth that is already here.

Hence, the arguments against building schools falling flat. Lots of kids are here in schools, and more are coming to the schools that are also ALREADY here.

They were within HALF A PERCENTAGE POINT on their projections on this year's student growth: They had projected an enrollment this year of 57,317 kids, and 57,009 showed up by 9/30.

They have in- and out-migration formulas that have been historically accurate within les than a percentage point since I've lived here.

The kids are here, and more are coming.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 8, 2008 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)

And just how many of the students enrolled are here illegally? I know that the courts have ruled that we, the great unwashed masses of ignorant taxpayers, have to pony up even more of our taxes to educate the children of the illegal alien invaders - BUT there is no restriction on forwarding the information on their parents to ICE. The school budget could be reduced dramatically if these illegals took themselves and their children outta town. Then the children of citizens and those here legally would have more than sufficient funds to educate them well.

Posted by pjvm (anonymous) on October 9, 2008 at 9:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The children in Loudoun schools are not illegal aliens. Raising that issue is just a racist distraction. The truth is the children come from families who are legal residents of Loudoun and have a legal mandate to receive educational services from the county.

One of the rights reserved to the states is the education of its residents. If we are so shortsighted as to shortchange our children, what kind of society are we creating for them?

People complain about taxes, but the most important asset we have is our children. We must provide for their basic needs, including an education.

The citizens of Loudoun must make it clear to our supervisors that we value our children's wellbeing most highly, even if it means adding a few cents to the tax rates.

Hopefully the BOS will be courageous enough to resist the negativists who predict economic doom if we all must pay another hundred dollars on our tax bill.

The children are our future. We cannot abandon them in these difficult times.

Posted by LoudounPatriot (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 12:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"The children in Loudoun schools are not illegal aliens."
--
Prove it. And the people who whine about "raaaaaaaaaaacism" in everything they see are the only racists here. And as far as your comment re "negativists" on "economic doom" go, lmao... dude, have you actually opened a newspaper recently? Look at the world stock markets, look at the projections for this to spiral into the manufacturing sector and destroy retail holiday sales. In short: get a clue. This is bad, and it's getting worse.

Posted by Justthefacts (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 4:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How many kids will not return to LCPS due to forclosures or job lost by parents? If you think people are buying house and expanding the work force you have lost your freeking mind.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 8:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Budget situation admittedly is very very bad. I hope citizens will push BOS to move forward immediately to quit throwing money away on litigation and assinine road projects and settle so they can start building Woodgrove (HS-3) immediately. It is 6 years overdue. Unlike any other school built before it, it could easily open at capacity. Bonds have been approved for it and centrally located Leesburg school HS-10 (Tuscarora HS). If a moratorium on new school construction is a serious consideration due to the budget shortfall, a complete adjustment of these new and all other existing school boundaries will be needed to re-distribute children throughout the entire County. If there is pain due to overcrowded schools, it needs to be felt universally and equally across ALL districts. Continuing to put the lions share of the budget burden on western students is not acceptable.

Posted by stinger (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Continuing to put the lions share of the budget burden on western students is not acceptable."

Agreed it's undesirable, but then again the eastern residents get the lions share of the crime/overcrowding/gang burden, which is even more undesirable, so there ya go!

Posted by Justthefacts (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Good point. So tell your Supervisor to drop the $8M paving project and use 25% of those funds to improve neglected roads between Round Hill and Hamilton and settle. Use remaining 75% of those funds (that's $6M) for more patrols/officers to fight crime in the east. Proposing $8M road project to avoid spending $2M on other road projects makes NO sense. How BOS members can support this ridiculous proposal when the traffic study never even recommended it is beyond comprehension. Citizens throughout the County should urge their Supervisor to quit wasting limited funds on this protracted litigation! Litigation which is being extended through January 2009 according to County Judge's ruling today. According to LCPS, every year this project gets delayed costs $4M we simply don't have to waste.

Posted by stinger (anonymous) on October 10, 2008 at 11:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

funnyguy, you are stuck on foreclosures.

If you want to think that the half-a-percentage-point difference between projection and enrollment this year was due to that, knock yourself out.

This is a family community, and most of the kids in the system are in the lower grades, with younger siblings who have yet to enter the process.

Sarah, I've followed the western high school for years, and know how horrible the stopgap measures are out there. I think a LOT of it has to do with the blank refusal on the part of some officials to acknowledge that growth has occurred in the rural policy area too.

I don't know what it does for your case to continue to seem to advocate that the model be enacted countywide; Valley desperately needs relief. So does Mercer, so will Freedom, and so on.

Yes, stop the litigation.

And don't fire off any more with stupid decisions elsewhere in the county.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 11, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara, I think the point is obvious: If all areas were treated equally, perhaps enough voices of protest that matter to leaders would finally be heard.

Posted by stinger (anonymous) on October 12, 2008 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara, my argument against building schools hasn't fallen flat, and doesn't depend on any statistic with regards to children currently in the system, or will be in the system in the future.
THERE IS NO MONEY.
Just like you cannot wring blood from a stone, you cannot expect the taxpayers to stomach another insane increase in taxes in 2009, which is likely to be economically worse than 2008. Additionally, LCPS cannot simply sit in a holding pattern over this issue, as they're dealing with a budget deficit irrespective of any new buildings. We need major cuts in the educational system now, not proposals to spend more money that we don't have.

Posted by Hoqenishy (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Typical depression scare tactics---claim there is no money. The fact is, there is money, just not as much. Instead of creating panic, let's look at the numbers that Mr. Bowers comes up with before we give credence to those who run around screaming that the sky is falling and there is no money.

The bitter anti-education rhetoric that demands major cuts in education really means that our children don't count. Be careful of people who are angry and reactive, and who cannot see past their shortsighted, hysterical rantings.

We're talking about our children's futures and we need to carefully consider the impacts of our decisions on their wellbeing.

Those who cannot agree that our children come first do not desire the respect of civil discourse. They may be the most dangerous members of our community.

Posted by LoudounPatriot (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 11:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hoq, I see you've jumped back here rather than respond to the data I posted per your request.

Yes, it does fall flat. The law requires the county to provide schools. (It even mandates a child-per-computer ratio).

It does not (yet) mandate promethean boards.

Patriot is right. There isn't NO money, there's a lot LESS.

So, let's stop giving tax breaks for owning airplanes and horses (do we tax boats? if we do, other pleasure and hobby craft should be treated equally), let's stop giving tax benefits for having large yards.

Let's cut some frills, because there are basic NECESSITIES we have to provide by law.

Sarah, I agree that countywide we SHOULD be treated equally. I disagree that THAT means we should all be treated BADLY.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 16, 2008 at 3:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)