bloom said:
Do you feel that the cost/sq ft price differences are impacted in a significant way by the HS zoning? Are people willing to pay more to attend CSHS? I am genuinely curious, after reading these threads, whether Consol has items that can be solved with zoning or if they simply have issues with public perception or management that would be better addressed through other avenues. No kids in school, but I have been on both HS campuses and the student bodies seem very similar in their levels of engagement with the process. My curiosity is peaked, because I find it hard to believe everyone is arguing over the additional distance (everyone drove it for years, including IL/Castlegate) , or wanting their kids in a new facility. I feel like Consol is PERCEIVED (not that it does) to have issues that have nothing to do with location, building and that even with a balanced SES, parents prefer CSHS. Worked my entire life in marketing and this fascinates me.
Edit:I know the numbers need to be fixed to utilize facilities. It just seems (based on some comments on the board) that effective marketing and innovative programs might make Consol a highly desirable placement which would reduce zoning complaints and perhaps draw in voluntary transfers.
A few comments here. First, to me the district has done an effective job at marketing what is actually there in the sense that I believe that my kids will get a great education at either school. One of ours decided to attend Consol out of zone to get something they can't get at CSHS, and we had no hesitation in letting them. Consol continues to thump CSHS on numbers of National Merit Scholars, for instance, in spite of the SES balance being what it has been. But the marketing approach the district has taken to the issue is to say that both are great schools with comparable programs, so it shouldn't matter which you attend. The logical response is that yes, both are great schools, but if it's going to cost me more to attend Consol in the way of increased travel times and broken continuity with no benefit to our kids, why would I want to do that?
As for innovative programs, the district hasn't taken that approach much in the high schools, and that's what's really lacking, not marketing. Marketing won't help much if the product isn't different. Until now it's all been about both schools being great and giving the kids roughly the same things. Maybe the size of the district has made magnet programs, etc., less practical, but I agree that they might be better off differentiating the schools a little more.
Two comments about history--first, because we're in a growing neighborhood many of us moved into IL when it was zoned to CSHS, so we there isn't a memory of it being otherwise. Secondly, in the past this hasn't just been about high school zoning. In the 2016 go-round many on the board pushed to rezone IL/Nantucket to Oakwood/AMCMS in addition to Consol, with some hints and rumors of elementary rezoning to Pebble Creek as well (we'll see in the fall...). I don't have enough history to know, but I doubt IL has ever been zoned to Oakwood/AMCMS as a developed neighborhood. The travel costs would have definitely been higher for us than just high school rezoning would be. We moved into IL with a reasonably convenient school situation given the type of neighborhood we're in; no school is more than about 10 minutes away. Moving to Oakwood/AMCMS/AMCHS would have basically doubled our travel time to all of the post-elementary schools and spread the kids out all over town. Would it have been completely unmanageable? Probably not, but if you do the math it's clear there would have been a noticeable difference.
There has been a response from some in the community that we shouldn't have any expectation of convenience because we chose to live in the type of neighborhood we do. "You live in Indian Lakes, you must like to drive!" was one comment I heard in 2016, and there have been some similar sentiments in this thread, people saying you don't live on acreage lots for convenience, etc. When we moved in we looked at the tradeoffs between convenience and other factors and found them to be reasonable, just like anybody in any neighborhood does when deciding where to live. I don't welcome negative changes in the balance between those issues, and I especially don't welcome others telling me that I shouldn't care if school days become more hectic for our family because I chose to live where I do. I pay taxes like the rest of you, for crying out loud. In watching the 2016 process I felt that there were some board members who preferred to just completely ignore travel times unless they could do everything they wanted to do--not just the things the district needed to do--before looking at travel times. So, there is a history to this and some wariness on the part of some parents.
Standard caveat applies here--I know the board is looking at tradeoffs, has real issues to deal with, etc. I frankly don't have much opinion about what they should do in the current situation. Just trying to explain a point of view.
