So, take a look at the link below.
This was presented at the 01/25/18 meeting when the board decided that rezoning needed to occur and the bond needed to be delayed:

A- rezoning needed to happen based on FC LOCAL parameters exceeding 12%. The CURRENT numbers with grandfathered students DOES NOT meet the guidelines for rezoning. They are rezoning based on predicted/NOT ACTUAL enrollment numbers (note that the grandfathering numbers reflect low SES was better WITH the grandfathered students...ie the last rezoning actually made comparable composition worse) SO, why are we rezoning???? At the current moment we are within the FC Local parameters of <12% (look at the fine print GF numbers)

B- the numbers presented for the reasons behind the "delayed bonding" are questionable.
(Let me emphasize that I am not a mathematician or statistician or expert in bonds...but I can do simple math so this is my take on these numbers, PLEASE correct me if I am wrong)
Bonding in 2018 (which I "think" was the original plan in the 2016 rezoning) shows a DECREASE in taxes for the following 7 years.
Bonding in 2019 shows a greater decrease in in the tax rate the first 2 years, but then an INCREASE In the tax rate for 2 years before it declines for the remaining 3 years. So, delaying the bond results in 2 years of TAX INCREASES.

That being said, these numbers reflect a growth of 6% the first 2 years and a very conservative growth of 3% the following 5 years. It was mentioned that CS is currently growing at rate much greater than the 6% projection. Seems like we (the taxpayers) and the students that will be in 2 high schools that will be over capacity for years with the current plans (it takes 3 years to build a new school) would benefit from bonding sooner than later. That being said, the board questioned the possibility of a bond passing before, now they will have a harder time passing one because the community (at least half of it that votes) feels like they don't actually care about the kids that they serve as trustees.

http://web.csisd.org/school_board/agendas/2017-2018/February/EalyEnrollProjs-aaa-JanWkshp.pdf

Just take a look and see how the numbers "SPIN"

If the charter school is such "good news" why does CSISD keep downplaying it and casting it in a negative way?

BUBBLE GUM FOR THE WIN! It has to be better than what we are currently doing! Especially when it comes down to the 58 students that got screwed in grandfathering!

I think this is a GIANT disservice to our community's 8th graders. It's a total slap in the face to all that have made schedules, toured schools, completed tryouts, etc. The board COULD have made a positive difference in the lives of the students they serve. 58 of them to be exact. Instead they decided to neglect their mission statement for success. I thought it was about EACH LIFE...EACH DAY....EACH HOUR. What about those 58 lives for the next 4 years??? Where do they fit in to the "success" mission statement? Oh, that's right, kids are supposed to be "resilient".... doesn't matter that each child is different.

ZFG said:

---

I think this is a GIANT disservice to our community's 8th graders. It's a total slap in the face to all that have made schedules, toured schools, completed tryouts, etc. The board COULD have made a positive difference in the lives of the students they serve. 58 of them to be exact. Instead they decided to neglect their mission statement for success. I thought it was about EACH LIFE...EACH DAY....EACH HOUR. What about those 58 lives for the next 4 years??? Where do they fit in to the "success" mission statement? Oh, that's right, kids are supposed to be "resilient".... doesn't matter that each child is different.

---

Truth. Today, Williams even asked Ealy other than the numbers, what's bad about grandfathering the 8th graders. Ealy basically said there wasn't anything else. Congratulations, school board. You decided your numbers were more important than my daughter.

I feel for you ZFG. I only slept about 3 hours last night because of this nonsense. I do believe I figured out why they would not grandfather 8th graders. They want to force this decision before anyone has a chance to appeal or overturn it. If they can force these poor kids into going to consol, it would make it much harder to overturn. Imagine the mess once its implemented and kids are moved? Nobody agrees with not grandfathering the 8th graders on either side of this zoning fiasco. CSISD needs to be forced to do whats right by these kids, its only 58 of them!

#Fateof58

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.

---

Just so you, and everyone else, is clear the other maps under consideration had been up for MONTHS! I quit paying attention because NONE of them had my neighborhood changing. You really think less than 2 weeks notice before they approve this dumpster fire of a map after having the other maps out there for months is due process? I'd be happy to throw some money in the kitty if there's an attorney out there willing to take this on. This has class action lawsuit written all over it. If there's an attorney out there willing to take this on, or someone knows of a name of one who would post it.

viejo said:

---

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.

---

Just so you, and everyone else, is clear the other maps under consideration had been up for MONTHS! I quit paying attention because NONE of them had my neighborhood changing. You really think less than 2 weeks notice before they approve this dumpster fire of a map after having the other maps out there for months is due process? I'd be happy to throw some money in the kitty if there's an attorney out there willing to take this on. This has class action lawsuit written all over it. If there's an attorney out there willing to take this on, or someone knows of a name of one who would post it.

---

So, because some do not agree with the board's decision and have money to "throw into the kitty" the right thing to do is hire an attorney to attempt to thwart a decision they don't like. Never mind the fact that "due process" doesn't even apply here.

This is the school board page for CSISD:
https://www.csisd.org/apps/pages/index.jsp?uREC_ID=161714&type=d&pREC_ID=726908
It lists the Board members and their terms etc.

Apparently 7/7 of the school board members neighborhoods were not changed in re-zoning.

We are fortunate to have such benelovent overlords.

Oogway said:

---

I am surprised the Margraves tract was sent north. I know w that was discussed many many pages ago, but I thought it would end up staying with the Nantucket/IL group.

Edit-spelling

---

The Margraves move was easy for board because at the next re-zone for the new HS or build out of CSHS they'll just move it back. No impact now, save face and move it back later. Easy.

This is the main reason that CG was never a proposal. It was brought up and never fully discussed. It never made it onto a map or into a discussion and the similarities between CG and Creek Meadows being annexed are numerous. Guess Creek Meadows should have had a resident on the board and their chances of being rezoned would have decreased.

ChiefHaus said:

---

This is the main reason that CG was never a proposal. It was brought up and never fully discussed. It never made it onto a map or into a discussion and the similarities between CG and Creek Meadows being annexed are numerous. Guess Creek Meadows should have had a board member and then everything would have stayed the same.

---

ChifHaus, they actually were very sure to bring up castle gate for the first time yesterday. This was a save face move and never considered, watch the film. They talked about how many kids walked from there across WM D Fitchway's four lane Highway. Again, it was clear what they wanted to do at the dog and pony show "workshop" they had over a week ago. They also covered the developer problem everyone had by including margraves. I'm just glad they decided against using eye drops when they talked about the walkers ..... BTW ANYBODY SEE THE CURRENT CONSOL PARENT SPEAKING OUT ABOUT HAVING A WALKER NOW BEING BUSSED TO CSHS???

Perhaps it's time to consider building those skills in our youth that will help make them successful in adulthood: resiliencency, adaptability, independence, and contentiousness towards others. Let's not insist on removing every roadblock that comes their way, but instead give them the skills to work through the struggle. They will come out on the other side stronger.

Everyone loves advice from someone not affected by the decision.

Yes, I will watch the whole thing as I have all the others. I plan on counting all the kids walking across FItch on Monday. Over/under on 10 total?

Hunter Goodwin was one of like, 5 donors to Geralyn Nolan's campaign, with a donation of $500, her second largest. It's public record, but I don't think anyone has figured out how to post a PDF onto this thread. I'm clicking through those little buttons above, and there's lots of opportunity to attach links, but this is a PDF (if the Staff wants to help us on this, please advise). Regardless, the proof is out there and many have seen it.

Now, to Mrs. Nolan's credit, last night she was a strong proponent of moving Margraves (Goodwin's development) to Consol, when it's rumored that he was not too excited about that. She felt like there needed to be more future growth zoned for Consol, and she's right. So in this case, she did what was right, and she deserves credit for that. I don't know of other developers that have donated to other's campaigns, but I'm sure it happens, and will continue to happen. We just need to hold our board members accountable to what their responsibilities are as a trustee, to the community at large, and to the children. Not to donors.

They weren't. He was mistaken about that time frame.

However, no maps encompassing Creek Meadows were up prior to the public hearing. They did not get one chance for their voice to be heard in public.

Isn't that what IL did? Hire an attorney, pull a few records and ask some questions? They aren't the ones being bused across town now.

You know Oog, I just don't know about other donors, and the question is it worthwhile to keep our eyes on that topic. Maybe....they need to know that we are all watching.

In my personal opinion, I think we need to rid ourselves of board members that think it's OKAY TO MOVE PEOPLE AROUND A LOT. It's NOT okay to rezone every year or every 2 years, unless we are building new schools ALL THE TIME (a la, Frisco ISD). That is unacceptable in CSISD who adds a new school every 5yrs or so. It hurts children, and it hinders their ability to focus on academics, because they are so emotionally distraught with the idea of moving and having to be separated from their precious social circles and extracurricular relationships (sports, music, etc). Does it teach them life skills (resiliency, adaptability, etc)? I mean, I guess, but I don't think that needs to be forced on our kids and then discarded as "eh, they'll be fine, it's okay to cry about it, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger". And why do we feel it's okay to force resiliency on 58 kids and not 13000 kids? Why do we protect maybe 20 walking kids and not force THEM to adapt? There's no rhyme or reason on why we pick on some kids but not others. If we get it WRONG, and have to rezone 2 years later, we should be kind to students like these 58 8th graders and let them off the hook. "Our bad, we miscalculated, you can stay at your school, we will take care of the ramifications." That is what we need in our trustees, not someone who says "this is about tax payers, and we need to make sure they are happy, the kids will be fine." Put the kids first.

Ah, you are mistaken. If that's what you've been told then you've been misled.