Yeah, they had been referring to Frisco from the perspective that they/Frisco has a history of rezoning every year so we/CS should be prepared to do that as well. Though the Board quickly stopped referring to Frisco now that most now know Frisco does it primarily based on geographic growth making what what we do look absurd.

Good find with Frisco Oogway. When I first pulled up the map, I went cross eyed! After studying all the info, it turns out Frisco would be an argument agains csisd's current use of wealth or "free lunch" students for zoning. They have 10 or so high schools, thats why the map looks so crazy. All of them make sense as far as proximity, and feeder schools. I also read through all of Frisco's zoning process, and saw nothing resembling CSISD. They zone for proximity and school feeder flow like it should be, no mention of demographics like free lunch or SES population being used. If you want to see a school board with a real challenge, look at Frisco. Looks like they are doing an honest job at it. Do not be fooled by csisd using school population growth as an excuse for hacking a map up. We have two high schools to map and feed, not 10. Here are some links that show all this info if you have the time to research:

Zoning process:
http://www.friscoisd.org/departments/attendance-zones/rezoning

School map:
http://www.friscoisd.org/docs/default-source/attendance-zones-kml/downloads/2018-2019/2018-19-high-schools.pdf?sfvrsn=2

Feeder program:
http://www.friscoisd.org/docs/default-source/attendance-zones-kml/downloads/2018-2019/2018-19-feeder-patterns.pdf?sfvrsn=2

An who does Frisco's demographic consulting? Oh its PASA here in College Station. Unfortunately, normally what the demographers are tasked with is find a set of numbers that justify the board's/superintendent's agenda. They will advise them if they ask for something out bounds to the point of being illegal, but otherwise its the customer is boss.

To answer CS78 on what they can do to avoid this continuing: an option would be to fill out this form to the ACLU explaining that wealth and challenged student "demographics" are being used to zone our district, as well as a school board member referring to them as a "burden" :https://action.aclu.org/legal-intake/texas-legal-intake
- the ACLU recently dropped the hammer on another Texas city using Wealth as a decision maker.

Another place to email would be TEA's: https://tea.texas.gov/About_TEA/Contact_Us/Complaints/TEA_General_Complaint_Form/

MTTANK said:

---

To answer CS78 on what they can do to avoid this continuing: an option would be to fill out this form to the ACLU explaining that wealth and challenged student "demographics" are being used to zone our district, as well as a school board member referring to them as a "burden" :https://action.aclu.org/legal-intake/texas-legal-intake
- the ACLU recently dropped the hammer on another Texas city using Wealth as a decision maker.

Another place to email would be TEA's: https://tea.texas.gov/About_TEA/Contact_Us/Complaints/TEA_General_Complaint_Form/

---

SES is being used more an more throughout the country. Good luck with that. The district has a better argument they are helping low SES students than your argument they are somehow being hurt.

The district is trying to zone in a way that helps the whole district, including low SES.

Oogway, I think your post on Mckinney might actually be valid in supporting CSISD with SES! However, if you read the article you will see they are concerned with one school being 90% SES and another 10%, so used in cases of extreme disparity. I mentioned before in the hundreds of top scoring districts I researched I might have found one that has a party with the school zone map. I think another key difference here would be the use of wealth or "free lunch" students by CSISD. Mckinney uses no such method, I also am pretty sure a school board member there has not referred to there students as a "burden". As far as the ACLU case, I simply saw a headline. Actually multiple headlines on wealth discrimination cases, as well as race or special education status. I don't have time to become a lawyer, I have spent more than enough figuring out whats really going on with our school district. I will leave all this stuff to the pros and let them decide. I think everyone knows exactly whats being discriminated against by CSISD's use of some certain "demographics" to try and make consol a super school.

I started to compile a list of research that shows otherwise, but I decided to spare everyone the theatrics. After all, everybody has google. Not surprising to me at all, California has tried this method years ago and it failed terribly. My stance is not that no other district in the universe is nuts and making a mess of things. My strong stance is that this is not compton, we do not have enough of a problem in the first place to constitute a rarely used hail mary tactic. My even stronger stance is that very very few people in our community want districts drawn according to wealth. I would venture to say the majority of our community that would argue for this wealth zoning would be a few elitist currently zoned to consol that are interested in turning it into a super school. The one thing I heard in the boards only forum that let the community speak, was people over and over and over that all they want is continuity for their kids. This has done nothing but pit one side of town against another, and put undue strain on our communities families. We all have heard the heart splitting stories of families that came here out of the military for continuity and that there kids have been rezoned x number of times and now they will be driving their kids to two separate high schools. I think people accept being rezoned because of explosive growth, or to a newly built school to accommodate this growth. I also know people accept being zoned due to proximity, because this is what most every district is doing! Zone for proximity going forward for the sake of our families and community.

MTTANK said:

---

I started to compile a list of research that shows otherwise, but I decided to spare everyone the theatrics. After all, everybody has google. Not surprising to me at all, California has tried this method years ago and it failed terribly. My stance is not that no other district in the universe is nuts and making a mess of things. My strong stance is that this is not compton, we do not have enough of a problem in the first place to constitute a rarely used hail mary tactic. My even stronger stance is that very very few people in our community want districts drawn according to wealth. I would venture to say the majority of our community that would argue for this wealth zoning would be a few elitist currently zoned to consol that are interested in turning it into a super school. The one thing I heard in the boards only forum that let the community speak, was people over and over and over that all they want is continuity for their kids. This has done nothing but pit one side of town against another, and put undue strain on our communities families. We all have heard the heart splitting stories of families that came here out of the military for continuity and that there kids have been rezoned x number of times and now they will be driving their kids to two separate high schools. I think people accept being rezoned because of explosive growth, or to a newly built school to accommodate this growth. I also know people accept being zoned due to proximity, because this is what most every district is doing! Zone for proximity going forward for the sake of our families and community.

---

I'm having a hard time following your narrative. On the one hand you are suggesting people file complaints with the ACLU to not have low SES bussed out to CSHS but on the other hand you are saying its the elitist of Consol wanting a super school. I'll tell you a little bit about the group of people you suggest are elitists currently zoned for Consol. In 2010, the decision was made to keep us at Consol instead of zoning us for schools closer to our neighborhoods. Our schools have a much larger portion of low SES students at all levels and rather than chase boundaries and move out of our neighborhoods, we quickly figured out how to embrace it. When our schools need volunteers, we show up because we know our low SES parents in many cases cannot. When our schools ask for financial help to assist our students in need, we donate. Whether that's providing extra money to give another student a yearbook or buying extra Christmas gifts so that a low SES child has a special holiday. We don't have the resources to charter fancy buses to football games so when our low SES students or their families have transportation issues, we step in and give them a ride. We recognize that our kids cannot be sheltered by a bubble and that the populations that they are within are the real world. You mention pitting one side of town against another, but that is EXACTLY what we as parents, property owners, and tax payers want to end and this is an opportunity for the board to finally get it right.

AgGirlCO95, I am sorry if I have offended you or your "demographic". I do notice you are brand new to texags and interested in this only this thread. I think you mentioned some great things that are being done as a community to actually help students. For reference, there was a mass exodus from the east when demographic zoning last occurred. There was also an overwhelming amount of new students in this area put in private schools such as brazos Christian and Allen. The fact of the matter is there was recently a neighborhood meeting in the East where a school board member noted poor and challenged students as a burden to consol. When this was said that was a roar of applause from the crowd. I know that this is a popularity contest for conso, and I can understand where it comes from. It is not to help poor and challenged students. If it was we would not be calling them names. Our board would also not be bussing the poor and challenged students to CSHS that are within walking/biking distance to consol. Of course when it helps to send wealth to consol, its all of the sudden a big deal to bus students in walking distance to CSHS to Consol.

MTTANK said:

---

AgGirlCO95, I am sorry if I have offended you or your "demographic". I do notice you are brand new to texags and interested in this only this thread. I think you mentioned some great things that are being done as a community to actually help students. For reference, there was a mass exodus from the east when demographic zoning last occurred. There was also an overwhelming amount of new students in this area put in private schools such as brazos Christian and Allen. The fact of the matter is there was recently a neighborhood meeting in the East where a school board member noted poor and challenged students as a burden to consol. When this was said that was a roar of applause from the crowd. I know that this is a popularity contest for conso, and I can understand where it comes from. It is not to help poor and challenged students. If it was we would not be calling them names. Our board would also not be bussing the poor and challenged students to CSHS that are within walking/biking distance to consol. Of course when it helps to send wealth to consol, its all of the sudden a big deal to bus students in walking distance to CSHS to Consol.

---

Again, having a hard time following your train of thought here. You reference the mass exodus from the east but if you don't balance the low SES or continue to add to it at Consol MORE people will leave the east, LESS people will move into our homes for sale and newly developed areas and the capacity issues at CSHS will become even a greater problem. This is no "popularity" contest for Consol, remember we are the ones having to give extensive tours to realtors to prove our school is not a scary place. Lastly, I've already pointed out, we don't treat our low SES kids as a burden. If we really felt that way, we would move. We do the best we can with the resources we have to make our schools the best they can be, inclusive of all the students at our campuses. If indeed that board member used that term, it was a very poor choice of words but to zero in on that as some sort of platform to rally the troops and prevent any affluent neighborhoods out west from being zoned into Consol seems way off base to me.

She is making perfect sense. As someone else already posted you are putting zero effort into understanding other points of view other than your own. You are putting a negative spin on every point someone makes. You are no longer adding to the discussion.

Hold up just a second AgGirlCO95...your post seems to imply that those of us currently zoned "purple" spend our money on "fancy buses" and NOT on doing things to help the kids that need it most. You imply that we don't have a significant population of kids that need the same type of help be it financially, transportation wise or other. I applaud all of the maroon zoned parents that help our community's less fortunate kids in the multitude of ways that you mentioned but GUESS WHAT???? The purple zoned parents do ALL of the same things to help the less fortunate kids in our schools too!

You mentioned that "Our schools have a much larger portion of low SES students at all levels". Are you sure about that? What about PC elementary? What is the low SES percentage there? Hasn't it been a couple of years since since the low SES area zoned to PC was was bulldozed? Isn't PC way UNDER capacity right now while 3 other elementary schools are over capacity? Doesn't seem like there's any hurry to balance that out.

By the "opportunity for the board to get it right" do you mean cherry picking the wealthiest neighborhoods from CSHS in hopes of funneling more money into Consol? By the way any of the proposed maps being considered, that's what it looks like. How does that "get it right"? There are a significant number of wealthy neighborhoods zoned to Consol, if the board moves the ones currently zoned to CSHS, what does that do to CSHS? Stacking more wealth at one school than another is RIGHT? Or is it only about "getting it right" for Consol?

He is frustrated and has refrained from attacking others with differing points of view. Being prior military with my oldest sons having attended 7 and 5, respectively, different school districts (not schools, districts) I can tell you that continuity is the biggest issue and having two different kids at two separate high schools is not what I had in mind when I moved here. However, there is no way out of it as far as I can see at this point.
Like I have stated in the past and I agree with MTTANK that the way we are going about the rezone is going to set everyone up for more stress when we do this again in 2-8 years. Consol needs a zone that is devoid of reliance on growth. All growth areas zoned to CSHS allow for the school/ISD to expand out as the population does. If for some crazy reason, trends reverse and Consol sees a large growth in students from a new development, it still won't cause enough overpopulation to create redistricting again in the next 5 years.

ZFG said:

---

Hold up just a second AgGirlCO95...your post seems to imply that those of us currently zoned "purple" spend our money on "fancy buses" and NOT on doing things to help the kids that need it most. You imply that we don't have a significant population of kids that need the same type of help be it financially, transportation wise or other. I applaud all of the maroon zoned parents that help our community's less fortunate kids in the multitude of ways that you mentioned but GUESS WHAT???? The purple zoned parents do ALL of the same things to help the less fortunate kids in our schools too!

---

You cannot logically make that assertion based on her post. Her making a positive out of a situation does not equal others doing the opposite or nothing at all.

ChiefHaus said:

---

I hope the board does not have another community forum, it will get ugly.

---

It doesn't have to be that way.
"Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath. For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God."

ZFG said:

---

Hold up just a second AgGirlCO95...your post seems to imply that those of us currently zoned "purple" spend our money on "fancy buses" and NOT on doing things to help the kids that need it most. You imply that we don't have a significant population of kids that need the same type of help be it financially, transportation wise or other. I applaud all of the maroon zoned parents that help our community's less fortunate kids in the multitude of ways that you mentioned but GUESS WHAT???? The purple zoned parents do ALL of the same things to help the less fortunate kids in our schools too!

You mentioned that "Our schools have a much larger portion of low SES students at all levels". Are you sure about that? What about PC elementary? What is the low SES percentage there? Hasn't it been a couple of years since since the low SES area zoned to PC was was bulldozed? Isn't PC way UNDER capacity right now while 3 other elementary schools are over capacity? Doesn't seem like there's any hurry to balance that out.

By the "opportunity for the board to get it right" do you mean cherry picking the wealthiest neighborhoods from CSHS in hopes of funneling more money into Consol? By the way any of the proposed maps being considered, that's what it looks like. How does that "get it right"? There are a significant number of wealthy neighborhoods zoned to Consol, if the board moves the ones currently zoned to CSHS, what does that do to CSHS? Stacking more wealth at one school than another is RIGHT? Or is it only about "getting it right" for Consol?

---

That isn't what I was implying at all, I was responding to being labeled a Consol elitist whose self-serving motive was to create a super school. I am not going to even spend a whole lot of time on your mentioning of Pebble Creek Elem. That school is under capacity and others are over capacity because people are moving into the perceived favorable zoned neighborhoods in south college station, the ones zoned for CSHS and I'm not sure why some of you don't get that. Getting it right is about going back to the original objectives of balancing the low SES between the two HS and balancing the numbers in terms of capacity. I am for option 2b plus because it does those two things. It also allows for continuity for the communities and students attending Greens Prairie Elem- they go there, then Wellborn, then Consol. You aren't stacking anymore wealth at one school over the other, if anything, you are balancing it.

I agree under one condition, those neighborhoods being moved do not rezone again to a different high school for at least 10 years. 2b+ only solves that if those neighborhoods stay AMCHS for the near and distant future. Build a 3rd high school out near Pebble Creek and then the east side of town will explode with growth.

ChiefHaus said:

---

I agree under one condition, those neighborhoods being moved do not rezone again to a different high school for at least 10 years. 2b+ only solves that if those neighborhoods stay AMCHS for the near and distant future. Build a 3rd high school out near Pebble Creek and then the east side of town will explode with growth.

---

And I totally agree with you on this.

ChiefHaus said:

---

I agree under one condition, those neighborhoods being moved do not rezone again to a different high school for at least 10 years. 2b+ only solves that if those neighborhoods stay AMCHS for the near and distant future. Build a 3rd high school out near Pebble Creek and then the east side of town will explode with growth.

---

I too agree with this, which would zone me to consol. It would also put my child on a bus for well over two hours a day, as punishment for living in a more expensive hood. But, I would be willing to agree with it and take one for the team, if they showed some kind of 10 year plan that made sense. I also agree they should place the next hs Southeast of town, bc it makes sense. Problem is they don't plan on doing that, they plan on putting it off N Dowling road. But lets pretend our school board starts trying to make decisions for our kids that make sense and puts the next hs east of town. If they are using free lunch and SES "demographics" still at this time, there's no telling what they will do with our school zone map. If you think it's a scary mess now, wait until we complicate it with another school. An east school would likely have the least ses or free lunch kidlets of any, and would for sure skyrocket consols demographics "burden". The funny thing is we are not even looking at the real issue we are faced with. If you combined both current highschools, we only have 5% capacity left. That's around 200 more total students, and they will be full. A new high school will be coming sooner than in 10 years, I would argue the process should have already been started. As long as you use wealth as a way to push people all over the place, it will be a mess that makes no sense. It's only going to get worse. For the record, I have done some studying(thanks Oogway) and don't completely reject the use of certain demographics to help influence zoning. I simply know that zoning a district should start with proximity as the #1 goal, and go from there. That's why over 99% of all other districts in texas use proximity, to give students and family continuity in their education.

ZFG said:

---

Hold up just a second AgGirlCO95...your post seems to imply that those of us currently zoned "purple" spend our money on "fancy buses" and NOT on doing things to help the kids that need it most. You imply that we don't have a significant population of kids that need the same type of help be it financially, transportation wise or other. I applaud all of the maroon zoned parents that help our community's less fortunate kids in the multitude of ways that you mentioned but GUESS WHAT???? The purple zoned parents do ALL of the same things to help the less fortunate kids in our schools too!

You mentioned that "Our schools have a much larger portion of low SES students at all levels". Are you sure about that? What about PC elementary? What is the low SES percentage there? Hasn't it been a couple of years since since the low SES area zoned to PC was was bulldozed? Isn't PC way UNDER capacity right now while 3 other elementary schools are over capacity? Doesn't seem like there's any hurry to balance that out.

By the "opportunity for the board to get it right" do you mean cherry picking the wealthiest neighborhoods from CSHS in hopes of funneling more money into Consol? By the way any of the proposed maps being considered, that's what it looks like. How does that "get it right"? There are a significant number of wealthy neighborhoods zoned to Consol, if the board moves the ones currently zoned to CSHS, what does that do to CSHS? Stacking more wealth at one school than another is RIGHT? Or is it only about "getting it right" for Consol?

---

Hate to burst the bubble, but the board will be rezoning elementary lines this fall for the new school being built and I fully expect them to address the PC Elem situation. PC Elem has lost students because families are not moving into PC. It is all related to zoning. If you look at South Knoll, Southwood Valley, College Hills, Oakwood, and AMCMS all of those schools have significant numbers of low SES. You conveniently chose PC - a school that proves that the zoning out south is all out of whack. It has lost over 1/3 of its population since CSHS opened.

I find your cherry picking accusation off base and not fair. The board is looking at either Wellborn or the east side. Option 1 is not being used. If anything you should take note that an aggressive option such as 1 shows how many students live right by CSHS and why the board needs to look at getting more students into Consol. If there were a significant number of wealthy neighborhoods currently zoned to consol then we wouldn't see AMCMS at 45% low SES. It means those neighborhoods are aging out or in the case of Pebble Creek, people are choosing real estate west of 6.

Wellborn MS is expected to be similar to Pecan Trail when it opens this fall - half the number of low SES at AMCMS. Low ses numbers are underreported at both high schools. Kids become too self conscious and don't sign up. That happens more at Consol thanCSHS. How do we know that? Consol dropped to 35% while the only middle school that currently feeds into it is at 45%. CSHS sits at 20% and CSMS is closer to 23%.