We are only talking a couple extra miles of bussing. Also the whole neighborhood gets bussed.
CSISD proposed boundary adjustments [Second Staff Warning on OP]
101,769 Views |
858 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by Oogway
There are Intermediate, Middle and High schools all closer to where I live that I am not zoned for. So yeah, I fully understand how it is to move students out to make a school more appealing.
Was I happy about it at first? No. This is how they have chosen to do things in our district for some time, this isn't new. Not saying I agree with it one way or the other, but I've had zero problems with any of the schools we have had to attend.
Was I happy about it at first? No. This is how they have chosen to do things in our district for some time, this isn't new. Not saying I agree with it one way or the other, but I've had zero problems with any of the schools we have had to attend.
I did not say anything about making school tough for low-SES kids. I said exposing everyone to people of different backgrounds helps prepare them for the adult world. I don't know about you, but as an adult, I have to deal with people from widely varying backgrounds on a daily basis.MTTANK said:
What are you talking about?! Are you now saying the district is bussing these SES kids away to make it more tough on them, and somehow that will make them a better job applicant? Why not kick them out of school and send them to southlake, really toughen them up and help them succeed. What does SES high school student population have to do with getting a job after school?!! Again, this is not trying to help any children. It is actually an insult to SES children to call them a burden and try and minimize the numbers at schools. An SES student has enough on their plate. They should not have to be bussed away from their community and the core group of kids they grew up with to help cushion some numbers for a schools administration!!This will not help them prepare for a job or make them a better candidate.
Never in my life have I called a low-SES child a burden. I don't know what you read that I wrote that made you think that.
Low-SES kids (and any kids being bused, for that matter) are not bused away from their community; they are bused with their community.
Whole neighborhoods of low SES kids do not get bussed. Look at the cutouts in the state street areas and now Anderson and they yellow island off of Harvey. They divide neighborhoods and some go to consol and some to CSHS. When I hear board members talk about how sad it would be to break up Shenandoah, or Bridle Gate of Dove Crossing (as in the earlier options) because kids are taken from that "community" of neighbors, I scoff at that and say, go walk the state streets and see where their lines are. They are absolutely divided. Apparently it's alright to do it to them, but not to midtown.
Edit - AND, a couple extra miles of bussing isn't the issue. It's being able to ride with neighbors that go to Consol/CSHS, and get rides home from school with friends and neighbors after football practice because there isn't a bus available.
Edit - AND, a couple extra miles of bussing isn't the issue. It's being able to ride with neighbors that go to Consol/CSHS, and get rides home from school with friends and neighbors after football practice because there isn't a bus available.
Just a thought/question...If the district is delaying the rezoning of elementary schools (which are also having significant over/under capacity issues) to wait and see the impact of the new charter school, why wouldn't they delay high school rezoning for the same reason?
The numbers they are using reflect the kids that will be coming into the schools in 2019 when this would take effect and that would include current 7th and 8th graders that may move to IL Texas so wouldn't that also have an impact on their projected capacity numbers?
I really think that the charter school might have a greater impact than they think and partially due to all of this rezoning mess. Many of the parents I have spoken to that are considering it are doing so with the goal of continuity for their children in mind.
The numbers they are using reflect the kids that will be coming into the schools in 2019 when this would take effect and that would include current 7th and 8th graders that may move to IL Texas so wouldn't that also have an impact on their projected capacity numbers?
I really think that the charter school might have a greater impact than they think and partially due to all of this rezoning mess. Many of the parents I have spoken to that are considering it are doing so with the goal of continuity for their children in mind.
Um, are you ever in the state street area much? Forgive me if you are, but the cut out at the top of the yellow wedge is an island surrounded by Ag Shacks populated with young adults who are not high schoolers. I'm sure they are pleasant enough neighbors for the k-12 set as long as the children don't mind stepping over the empty beer boxes and stepping around the lifted trucks blocking the sidewalk. I am over exaggerating, as there are perfectly quiet neighborhoods over there, but not so many k-12 students. Some of those are scattered further south in the rental homes and apartments, but yes, they are pretty much bussing together a neighborhood.
Your point regarding after school activities is valid, however. I don't know for certain, but the Director of Student Services, Chrissy Hester, might be able to answer that. She is super nice and has a big heart for all the students in the Distrct. Did you know Chrissy's Closet is named after her?
Edit to add- I am not referring to the north east wedge. That wedge is newer (from the last rezoning?) and a little tougher as it is not only far away, but also kind of a mish mash. They might want to revisit that one as it is isolated geographically in almost the same way the students out in Duck Haven/Saddle Creek are.
Your point regarding after school activities is valid, however. I don't know for certain, but the Director of Student Services, Chrissy Hester, might be able to answer that. She is super nice and has a big heart for all the students in the Distrct. Did you know Chrissy's Closet is named after her?
Edit to add- I am not referring to the north east wedge. That wedge is newer (from the last rezoning?) and a little tougher as it is not only far away, but also kind of a mish mash. They might want to revisit that one as it is isolated geographically in almost the same way the students out in Duck Haven/Saddle Creek are.
Another part of that wedge are the mobile home communities on Rock Prairie road west which are also taken en masse.
Umm... Yes. Thank you for asking. I have personally visited with families in the state streets area, been invited into their homes, and PERSONALLY been shown the dividing line between their streets. "Right here is CSHS, and across they fence they go to Consol...but down the street a little more, and they go to CSHS." So...yeah. It's real. And I can also PERSONALLY confirm, they don't like being bussed. They do value education for their children, and they like CSHS, but because of the travel distance, they often cannot make it to events at the school, and cannot go pick up a sick child.
Ag shacks are indeed moving in and buying these homes, but if you want to concede that the whole cutout is Ag Shacks, then I ask, why is it yellow? Is the demographer wrong YET AGAIN and we are zoning a neighborhood that does nothing to help the comparable composition goal? Are we chasing low SES kids around the whole city to make comparable composition a reality, when the truth is, no one can pin down anymore where they live? Again, I ask, can we please hear the Why behind this insanity?
Ag shacks are indeed moving in and buying these homes, but if you want to concede that the whole cutout is Ag Shacks, then I ask, why is it yellow? Is the demographer wrong YET AGAIN and we are zoning a neighborhood that does nothing to help the comparable composition goal? Are we chasing low SES kids around the whole city to make comparable composition a reality, when the truth is, no one can pin down anymore where they live? Again, I ask, can we please hear the Why behind this insanity?
ZFG said:
I don't know how to post a link to a map on here, but I THINK the land for the new HS is west of the railroad tracks in the area of Rock Prairie West and Holleman Drive. I also think that area is currently zoned to Consol.
Map can be found on the CSISD website under
The March 28th boundary adjustment workshop in the presentation link.
Edit- slide 15
https://1.cdn.edl.io/zWF6cUqAJlkembXMo5lPmA3Y44UuNyk54lA89qoWZs70Y1I2.pdf
Edit again!! I was wrong.
The RPW/Holleman area designated on this map by a red star is the location for a new elementary school. The yellow star directly below it is the land earmarked for the next high school.
Thanks. Seems like a strange location for the next one based on what I'm seeing with my eyes in terms of actual growth vs projected.
I am glad you have spoken with parents who live in the neighborhood for the CSHS zone (currently) but I am perplexed when you say it is carved up in that regard. My son's friend lives east of Welsh (south of Holleman) and he is zoned Consol and it is my understanding that west of Welsh is CSHS (excluding the apartments on SW Parkway). Are you talking about Luther?
No, I do not want the Board to chase groups all over town, that seems about as fruitless as trying to pin down which development is going to be up and running first. And I am sorry if you took my post to be sarcastic, but that whole area is being massively redeveloped and the cutout is really becoming an island. If it wasn't for the city trying to preserve some of the historic neighborhoods on both ends of the economic spectrum, that part of College Station would look completely different from what it was five years ago much less twenty.
No, I do not want the Board to chase groups all over town, that seems about as fruitless as trying to pin down which development is going to be up and running first. And I am sorry if you took my post to be sarcastic, but that whole area is being massively redeveloped and the cutout is really becoming an island. If it wasn't for the city trying to preserve some of the historic neighborhoods on both ends of the economic spectrum, that part of College Station would look completely different from what it was five years ago much less twenty.
Quote:
And I can also PERSONALLY confirm, they don't like being bussed. They do value education for their children, and they like CSHS, but because of the travel distance, they often cannot make it to events at the school, and cannot go pick up a sick child.
That can't be true.
I've read on here that personal conversations like that are made up sob stories.
Nobody that I know includes that area when they are talking about that wedge. It's the area within walking and biking distance of Consol that is north of 2818. Sending those kids to CSHS puts a strain on a lot of those families that they wouldn't have if they were zoned for Consol.Oogway said:
Another part of that wedge are the mobile home communities on Rock Prairie road west which are also taken en masse.
Looking at the boundary adjustments and the need for redestricting again, I think there are two fundamental problem of this (gerrymandering low-SES students aside).
1) As student rentals continue to move south, it's getting harder and harder to justify Consol as a "neighborhood school", and that's why it's pulling students from the south that are actually geographically closer to CSHS. Why not just move Consolidated further south, but not quite as south as CSHS, like placing it east of Highway 6 on Rock Prairie, and market the current Consol building as a prime spot for a corporate campus.
2) The need to have big high schools. If you didn't like the idea of Consol moving further south (can you imagine if TexAgs had been around in the early 1970s, when Consol moved from near campus to the southern fringes of town?), this is going to sound like heresy...but what if they built TWO smaller high schools to replace AMCHS and to take pressure off of CSHS? It would create more neighborhood-focused schools without constant redestricting. The problem would be that it no longer means Consol is 5A, and having a football-focused school is important to a lot of people. To give credit to the CSISD, it's hard to have this mega-high schools yet still satisfy people who want a "neighborhood" school.
1) As student rentals continue to move south, it's getting harder and harder to justify Consol as a "neighborhood school", and that's why it's pulling students from the south that are actually geographically closer to CSHS. Why not just move Consolidated further south, but not quite as south as CSHS, like placing it east of Highway 6 on Rock Prairie, and market the current Consol building as a prime spot for a corporate campus.
2) The need to have big high schools. If you didn't like the idea of Consol moving further south (can you imagine if TexAgs had been around in the early 1970s, when Consol moved from near campus to the southern fringes of town?), this is going to sound like heresy...but what if they built TWO smaller high schools to replace AMCHS and to take pressure off of CSHS? It would create more neighborhood-focused schools without constant redestricting. The problem would be that it no longer means Consol is 5A, and having a football-focused school is important to a lot of people. To give credit to the CSISD, it's hard to have this mega-high schools yet still satisfy people who want a "neighborhood" school.
Stupe, tigermom is saying the same thing you are. Thats what she is talking about as far as being bussed. I can confirm that she has walked this neighborhood for school related issues. I am considering doing the same, as well as retaining legal counsel. It is fundamentally wrong for the school board to call free lunch and SES students a "burden". They then take it a step further and try and bus them away from consol to help "perception" of the school. This has nothing to do with helping ANY students. They are singling out a "demographic" in our community as unwanted and undesirable. Every school has its own individual challenges, a good district works on those individually. You can see how that makes sense, as you can address an individual need. If you have a high SES population at one school, you make a plan to help those students at that level. If you have a school with a drug problem, you attack that issue and help those kids. Instead of working on helping students and actually doing something, our district is simply bussing students that need help in order to make consols numbers look better for "perception".
GIG 'EM
The district doesn't want a massive exodus away from Consol zones. It's not their only concern, but of course they are concerned with perception of each school. You are acting like that's some hidden secret motive.
Money is the issue... Have you checked your tax increases this year? Building more high schools means more duplication of facilities and overpaid admin positions. Moving console would be easier if they were turning the current campus into a combined middle/intermediate. But that is not needed.
The problem is the location of CSHS. They should have built it more to the east or west. Having both schools directly in line down the middle of town makes it more difficult to pick a east/west side to send past cshs up to consol. Hwy6 made for a nice boundry, and was easily implememted. Building it more east or west would have made locating hs 3 much easier as it could have just been on the opposite east/west side of town.
The problem is the location of CSHS. They should have built it more to the east or west. Having both schools directly in line down the middle of town makes it more difficult to pick a east/west side to send past cshs up to consol. Hwy6 made for a nice boundry, and was easily implememted. Building it more east or west would have made locating hs 3 much easier as it could have just been on the opposite east/west side of town.
The district administration and board obviously don't have the near the concern for the low SES kids that many on this forum do. I would love to be involved in being a voice for these families so please keep us posted. I believe an earlier poster mention single member districting-that seems to be one strategy for these kids/families to be represented. I also find it interesting that CSISD is doing what other districts did in the 70s-80s. My husband went through this 35 years ago in a large city in a different state. bussing and gerrymandering the lines didn't work then, school districts figured it out and stopped, yet now 30-40 years later this is the approach of CSISD.
Acting like it's a secret motive?
The school board was upfront that they were using demographics as one of the main factors when they laid out the guidelines to the committees last time. There are just a lot of us that disagree with some of the neighborhoods that they used due to how it was going to affect those families.
The school board was upfront that they were using demographics as one of the main factors when they laid out the guidelines to the committees last time. There are just a lot of us that disagree with some of the neighborhoods that they used due to how it was going to affect those families.
This area has grown to the size where we need that for both the School Board and the City Council.Quote:
I believe an earlier poster mention single member districtingthat seems to be one strategy for these kids/families to be represented.
Before I started digging into this mess, it was a secret to me. I don't think the masses know whats really behind FC local. Funny enough, most of my friends and business associates in the community were unaware that they were even trying to rezone. Most people do not have time attend and watch every school board meeting. I can find the time, but I honestly trusted my district to do what was best for our kids. Come to find out, they are not doing whats best for the kids, or even for the kids in any way. What they are doing is fundamentally wrong, on a number of levels. Thats why if you look at the majority of other districts school zoning, you won't see anything like whats going on here. This is not about one side of the community against another, or one option against another. This is about right from wrong.
GIG 'EM
I was not replying to you.
Tax increases never affected me in C.S. since I never owned a house (I rented). The problem with moving CSHS would be that there wasn't a space to move it. They couldn't move it west, as that would put them in Wellborn, and by the time Wellborn was actually annexed in 2011 CSHS's location was set in stone. Wellborn would still be in CSISD's boundaries anyway, and maybe in an alternate future, CSHS could've been built in Wellborn, TX proper, but all the schools seem to be built in areas that were annexed by CS by the time they were built. East would put CSHS next to Carter Lake accounting for the floodplain (this is roughly where potentially moving Consol could go).Expert Analysis said:
Money is the issue... Have you checked your tax increases this year? Building more high schools means more duplication of facilities and overpaid admin positions. Moving console would be easier if they were turning the current campus into a combined middle/intermediate. But that is not needed.
The problem is the location of CSHS. They should have built it more to the east or west. Having both schools directly in line down the middle of town makes it more difficult to pick a east/west side to send past cshs up to consol. Hwy6 made for a nice boundry, and was easily implememted. Building it more east or west would have made locating hs 3 much easier as it could have just been on the opposite east/west side of town.
I find it interesting that despite growth moving south and available land, CSISD dragged its feet on any potential west-of-the-railroad campuses for years and years until it became impossible to ignore.
Quote:
Funny enough, most of my friends and business associates in the community were unaware that they were even trying to rezone. Most people do not have time attend and watch every school board meeting.
There were a LOT of people that were caught off guard by this round of rezoning because not a word had been mention until after Christmas.
The school board told us that the rezoning in that happened in 2016 was going to be the last until 2023. Even though a lot of people knew their numbers were going to be off because of how they did the lines, we thought that they might at least learn a lesson about jumping the gun on it.
There were people joking after the championship game that rezoning might be coming, but it was...they thought...a joke.
Ah. I thought you were making a general statement.
My mistake.
My mistake.
MTTANK said:
Before I started digging into this mess, it was a secret to me. I don't think the masses know whats really behind FC local. Funny enough, most of my friends and business associates in the community were unaware that they were even trying to rezone. Most people do not have time attend and watch every school board meeting. I can find the time, but I honestly trusted my district to do what was best for our kids. Come to find out, they are not doing whats best for the kids, or even for the kids in any way. What they are doing is fundamentally wrong, on a number of levels. Thats why if you look at the majority of other districts school zoning, you won't see anything like whats going on here. This is not about one side of the community against another, or one option against another. This is about right from wrong.
I believe that if you create inequality between the schools you will see a significant movement of families away from Consol zones. It would reshape neighborhoods. It would end up creating even more inequality in the long run. Look at it from a Consol parents point of view. If the schools are close to equal they don't need to consider going through the trouble of moving. If a new family is moving to town school ranking and perception will play a role in their housing choice. Inequality will make rezoning occur more often as CSHS keeps filling up.
Your and others only point I consider reasonable is that some low SES students may be in walking distance to Consol. Perhaps those students should have the option to go to Consol instead if it is a burden on their families to bus. Perhaps they can redo the low SES zoning so it doesn't affect anyone in walking distance. But per my point above they need to keep the schools relatively equal.
You've referred to this several times. I have never heard any board members refer to any students as a burden, but I certainly don't watch every board meeting. Would you mind letting me know the date this happened, so I can go back and watch video of the meeting? If it is as bad as you make it sound, I'd certainly like to know who not to vote for in the future.MTTANK said:
It is fundamentally wrong for the school board to call free lunch and SES students a "burden".
Although I still believe that having comparability is important, I agree with this sentiment below even though I remember what the Administration and Board (at the time) expressed as their opinion regarding the busing (Can't say for sure which rezone that was but it was prior to CSHS being opened)
It is somewhat in aligned with what Stupe was talking about regarding proximity and walking. However, if that is not enough students and does not address the issue with overcrowding at CSHS, I still will not vote for a bond as other neighborhoods in the south will still probably need to attend Consol..
Quote:
Your and others only point I consider reasonable is that some low SES students may be in walking distance to Consol. Perhaps those students should have the option to go to Consol instead if it is a burden on their families to bus. Perhaps they can redo the low SES zoning so it doesn't affect anyone in walking distance.
It is somewhat in aligned with what Stupe was talking about regarding proximity and walking. However, if that is not enough students and does not address the issue with overcrowding at CSHS, I still will not vote for a bond as other neighborhoods in the south will still probably need to attend Consol..
This is about doing whats right for kids, not getting in a popularity contest war between high schools. I have over and over heard nothing but how many more national merits consol has, and how they actually rank better. This is America, people have the ability to chose what school they want their kids to attend. One school will always be more popular than another overall. Some people chose schools for sports, some for specific programs, some because they identify it with their region of the community. Its a fools errand to fight over, and to rezone a district to sway popularity. Thats why you do not see districts in Texas all hacked up. It is morally wrong to try and bus poor "free lunch" and disadvantaged "SES" students away from a school because you do not want them and you feel it hurts you in a school popularity contest. All that has really been done in this process as far as I am concerned is turn me off on consolidated HS. I really had no problem with it before all this, and would have been proud for my child to attend that school. Now I would be ashamed, I feel like it would be supporting something morally wrong. So it has done the opposite for me.
GIG 'EM
I disagree with your entire premise about being morally wrong. Nothing I've seen backs this stance. This is a public school district funded by all taxpayers together. It is not some businesses where a free market will create winners and losers. You keep using the low SES students to make your point. But I can't look past you wanting to keep your "community" together, which happens to not include a single low SES neighborhood. I believe the saying that you can't have your cake and eat it too applies.
Further, I think someone saying that zoning, resulting in inequality, has a better argument for it being immoral.
Further, I think someone saying that zoning, resulting in inequality, has a better argument for it being immoral.
Woah, there is a big difference between what some folks like Stupe have argued on behalf of the low SES students' obstacles (like walkability) and what you are insinuating here that Consolidated parents and the Board/Administration advocate.MTTANK said:
It is morally wrong to try and bus poor "free lunch" and disadvantaged "SES" students away from a school because you do not want them and you feel it hurts you in a school popularity contest.
I am not naive enough to think that some people in this community would rather not associate with or have to think about the disadvantaged in our community unless it is to be served by them, but I do not believe the majority of our community feels that way. Not by a long shot.
This times a thousand. CSISD has been zoning this way a while. Where was all the concern about low SES before from these specific neighborhoods in South CS? Why now all of a sudden?02skiag said:
I disagree with your entire premise about being morally wrong. Nothing I've seen backs this stance. This is a public school district funded by all taxpayers together. It is not some businesses where a free market will create winners and losers. You keep using the low SES students to make your point. But I can't look past you wanting to keep your "community" together, which happens to not include a single low SES neighborhood. I believe the saying that you can't have your cake and eat it too applies.
Further, I think someone saying that zoning, resulting in inequality, has a better argument for it being immoral.
There is no way the board approves the east/west plan or the north/south plan. I think it is also unlikely they go with scenario 3 as well. There are a couple of plans which seem to meet all of their objectives and keeps South CS neighborhoods/friends together in middle school and HS. I fully expect they will move forward with one of these scenarios and there will be people south of Fitch rezoned.
Yep. This doesn't even make sense because OW/AMCMS/Consol have way more low SES students and have since all the zoning took place.Oogway said:Woah, there is a big difference between what some folks like Stupe have argued on behalf of the low SES students' obstacles (like walkability) and what you are insinuating here that Consolidated parents and the Board/Administration advocate.MTTANK said:
It is morally wrong to try and bus poor "free lunch" and disadvantaged "SES" students away from a school because you do not want them and you feel it hurts you in a school popularity contest.
I am not naive enough to think that some people in this community would rather not associate with or have to think about the disadvantaged in our community unless it is to be served by them, but I do not believe the majority of our community feels that way. Not by a long shot.
I hear over and over and over again from my friends that the low SES is a burden to consol and the schools need to be evened out because of that. I appreciate those of you that deny that mentality exists and is widespread, but you are in complete denial (or are now embarrassed which is again appreciated because it is embarrassing). And I'll say it, Ms Nolan was the one that said these kids "are a burden we must all share". I was at the eastside HOA forum and at the time, was with the group that applauded (loudly) this comment. In hindsight, this is not the kind of mentality our board members should have. I do suspect Ms Nolan has a good heart and was responding to the sentiment of the group and is naive to what such a perspective really means
Who is embarrassed? If so, why would they be since this is a message board with mostly anonymous posters.
The only place I've ever heard the board members speak is either at workshops, meetings or in the media, so I haven't heard what you are hearing and as I've said before that is probably just as well. That sentiment that you heard (regarding 'burden,' would be something of which to be embarrassed. )
I am repeating myself, but with the District's history going back to at least the prior superintendent, CSISD has zoned this way for comparability and it has been a positive thing for the District overall. I do not believe they are doing it to massage the numbers or to punish a group of parents. I do not believe that low SES students are a burden, never have. I believe students who live in low SES areas have many challenges to overcome and the District that is mindful of these challenges sometimes has to balance the long term effects of its decisions. From what I've observed over the years, Clark Ealy and Mike Martindale are men of character and truly good people. As far as I can tell, so are the Board who are committed to seeing this adjustment through despite the difficulty. After someone posted about the possibility of changing school board governance to reflect areas of the city, I thought about it and it seems like it might have the same potential to further good or abuse privilege as the current way, which has withstood many many years of parents and students. Cannot speak for other parents and posters, but I am not embarrassed. I do try and understand and listen to people with whom I disagree (and that is some of you on here I am sure), and know that print suffers from inability to read tone, so if I offend people they will usually tell me!
The only place I've ever heard the board members speak is either at workshops, meetings or in the media, so I haven't heard what you are hearing and as I've said before that is probably just as well. That sentiment that you heard (regarding 'burden,' would be something of which to be embarrassed. )
I am repeating myself, but with the District's history going back to at least the prior superintendent, CSISD has zoned this way for comparability and it has been a positive thing for the District overall. I do not believe they are doing it to massage the numbers or to punish a group of parents. I do not believe that low SES students are a burden, never have. I believe students who live in low SES areas have many challenges to overcome and the District that is mindful of these challenges sometimes has to balance the long term effects of its decisions. From what I've observed over the years, Clark Ealy and Mike Martindale are men of character and truly good people. As far as I can tell, so are the Board who are committed to seeing this adjustment through despite the difficulty. After someone posted about the possibility of changing school board governance to reflect areas of the city, I thought about it and it seems like it might have the same potential to further good or abuse privilege as the current way, which has withstood many many years of parents and students. Cannot speak for other parents and posters, but I am not embarrassed. I do try and understand and listen to people with whom I disagree (and that is some of you on here I am sure), and know that print suffers from inability to read tone, so if I offend people they will usually tell me!