I'm really surprised the school board was underhanded enough to throw Creek Meadows at the last second and not give them the opportunity to speak at a public forum.............. Just kidding. I expected nothing less of them. I'm just glad they have not figured out a way to ship all the poor kids out of their district. yet.

jac4 said:

---

Going around our neighborhood too. Apparently Saddle Creek and Duck Haven to Consol.

IL still at CSHS. I guess the board member in IL (who shall not be named) held up his end of the bargain.

---

Not saying I favor the map. I'm sad for any child that has to move but Your comment shows a lack of understanding of the stats, issues or the process. One board member doesn't swing the the board. The approved map was motioned by two other board members. You should watch the meeting video.

We are all going to be right back in this mess again when Margraves doesn't have many families with school-age kids living in it.

Zero common sense.

Moving the farthest neighborhoods (Duck Haven, Saddle Creek, and Creek Meadows) is dumb and may hurt our property values. Time to fund a super pac against the incumbents.

Bravo to the school board!

They are going to piss people off regardless of the decision so it is better to make a quick decision and move on! I am guessing they got tired of the hate mail and just wanted to get this over with.

2 things:

1) This is the map they wanted in 2016, but the committee had too many members.

2) Telling me that a map that looks like a capital A is the best thing for the city is tantamount to peeing on me and telling me it's raining.

Yep. Redo. In three years for sure.

Crazy heartless. Several board members have no understanding about the 8th graders. They voted 5-2 against grandfathering this years 8th graders. Two board members have a heart.

I live in a Estates of Creek Meadows...none of the original plans had us to Consol...we had no opportunity to speak at forums. They didn't have us until they flipped the script at the last minute, and they planned it but didn't want to hear criticism or input from what they already knew they were going to do. Then, they vote on a night when others are expecting a vote the following week, and we are not allowed to speak. This process was rigged from the start...that is easy to understand...especially when greater than 90 percent of school district in Texas consider proximity. SES should not be a deciding criteria...if proximity causes overcrowding, then the school district board needs to bring a new high school more quickly to accommodate that growth. I have nothing against rezoning, but draw a horizontal line across HWY6 and let it be about proximity when it makes the commute balanced.

kyledr04 said:

---

Time to fund a super pac against the incumbents.

---

When do the next seats come up for reelection?

Anyone up to run and take on the fight?

I'd be wiling to assist with labor and funds. My kids are just now entering school and my youngest is 1. I do not want to be putting up with this BS for the next 17 years.

I'm stunned. I'm South of Greens Prairie Road just off of Wellborn. None of the early options included our neighborhood. So, I stopped paying attention. That, and my last kid is a sophomore at CSHS and isn't impacted. Still, all my kids graduated from CSHS. Now my neighborhood will have to go to AMCHS. Totally insane. Now, my property value is going to not increase as fast as Castlegate, Sweetwater, and Indian Lakes will. Thank you CSISD for negatively affecting my property values. I'll be voting, and will strongly support anyone who runs, against the five Trustees who voted for this insanity.

People actually do move to go to their preferred schools. I'd be suprised if there's not over capacity sooner than expected as a result which in turn will exaggerate the low SES variance.

BigBubba said:

---

Agmaker said:

---

Yep. Redo. In three years for sure.

---

Why? Because CSHS is overcrowded? I doubt that will be the cause.

Low-SES balance being off is the only reason I can think this plan would require another rezone before the new high school.

---

It's going to happen because they are using projections that aren't going to be accurate. People in Creek Meadows that have the means to move will do it. Just like people that were north of Graham Road did last time. People bought or rented in those areas due to proximity and now they are getting punished for making what was a logical decision.

Unless they projected Margraves to have low numbers, that will be off because very few people with families are going to buy there when they know their commute will be across town instead of a mile or so away.

There are going are going to be rezoning hearings in late 2019 or the early 2020 when this current plan goes into effect and they realize that the projected numbers aren't accurate. Again.

This plan is going to make Castlegate and Castlegate II home values go up, Creek Meadows / Estates home values will go down and in 2020 CG and CG II will be in the rezoning mix.

Margraves was a posturing move by the board to take all the developer connection talk heat off. It was likely the developer that wanted no part of it and asked to be out of the lime light. I would have done the same, smart move. The board has to be very proud of themselves for puling this one off:

- Could not pass ridiculous rezoning in 2015 because the committees put in place to fairly represent all regions of college station would no go for it.
-Got rid of the ability for any committees to be a part of rezoning to "streamline" the process.
-Made up FC LOCAL under the radar in late 2016 with mandates that forced them to rezone pretty much exactly how they wanted in 2015.
-During most recent elections told us they were not going to rezone for a "long time" when questioned by the media, 2 months after election got started rezoning
-Delayed the rezoning after they had the demographic numbers in order to ensure they secured the elections they wanted- This is what has caused 8th graders that already registered at their high school to now have their world turned upside down.
-Secured the election and took advantage of our at large policy by having almost entirely one school represented(consol)
-Changed the "demographics" threshold multiple times in the next year under FC LOCAL. Coming into the rezoning it was a 20% difference, on the initial zoning page it was 15%, and on presentation slides it moved to 12% somehow. Funny enough they showed a map that did not work because it caused 14% difference in that meeting.
-Manufactured maps to give no good options- picked kids in walking distance to cshs in one ridiculous option, other options took all the wealthy neighborhoods furthest south and sent them passed cshs to consol for a ridiculous bus ride.
-got called on trying to create a super school so backed off rich hoods and gave up on indian lakes
-In return zoned creek meadows last second and did not even give them the opportunity to speak at a public forum.

Overall it was an amazing job of manipulating their way into sending more rich kids to consol, and bussing the poor ones they did not want to cshs. Pretty impressive that they were able to take away any families choice in the school they want their kids to attend, especially considering this is a democracy. If you are rich, we will find you no matter where you hide. All this at the cost of kids and families....... priceless.

[You are being reinstated because you didn't specifically call a poster a complainer but we suggest that term not be used again. -Staff]

Ratsa said:

---

JR Ewing said:

---

I live in a Estates of Creek Meadows...none of the original plans had us to Consol...we had no opportunity to speak at forums. They didn't have us until they flipped the script at the last minute, and they planned it but didn't want to hear criticism or input from what they already knew they were going to do. Then, they vote on a night when others are expecting a vote the following week, and we are not allowed to speak. This process was rigged from the start...that is easy to understand...especially when greater than 90 percent of school district in Texas consider proximity. SES should not be a deciding criteria...if proximity causes overcrowding, then the school district board needs to bring a new high school more quickly to accommodate that growth. I have nothing against rezoning, but draw a horizontal line across HWY6 and let it be about proximity when it makes the commute balanced.

---

The approved map (except for the Margraves cutout, which currently has no homes, according to my understanding) has been on the CSISD website since the April 9th meeting. The email "feedback@csisd.org" was prominently displayed at the top of the boundary adjustment web page. You had the opportunity to provide feedback, if you were paying attention.

---

I'm pretty sure he referring to a public hearing.

I'm also pretty sure most people know that's what he's referring to.

It wasn't your ability to read that I was questioning.

I just found it funny that you were being sarcastic to him about "paying attention" when it was crystal clear that he was talking about a public, verbal hearing in order to give feedback.

Realtors are licking their chops right now - lots of homes are gonna be bought and hopefully sold over the next year.

I think the overall numbers for the charter school are 1800. Given the recent rezoning and board actions , I feel quite confident that the charter school WILL BE FULL! People want continuity for their children and quite honestly, many don't trust the board at this point. I think the charter school will have a much greater impact than CSISD planned for as a result of their recent actions.

When CSISD didn't grandfather/protect the 58 kids that needed it the most, they lost A LOT of trust. Seems like people will place their trust in a school that provides continuity at all levels!