CSISD proposed boundary adjustments [Second Staff Warning on OP]

101,323 Views | 858 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by Oogway
scs01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MTTANK said:

theres an 80/20 split under any plan other than option 3.
Where do you get that? As I read it, splits from Wellborn MS from the March 28 presentation are:

Option 1: 44% Consol, 56% CSHS
Option 2a: 27% Consol, 73% CSHS
Option 2b: 32% Consol, 68% CSHS
Option 3: 19% Consol, 81% CSHS.

My guess is that Option 3 splits at Wellborn are measured based on a shorter-term projection which doesn't include much action from Greens Prairie Reserve, and they will even out as the neighborhood grows.
AggieMom_38
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Dare I ask, what happened at the workshop tonight? Any conclusion or sense of where things are going?
1.618
How long do you want to ignore this user?
[There have already been two public warnings about being respectful on this thread. Any post that has to be edited after this one will get a ban of at least 3 days. Every poster on this board will be respectful or will have their ability to post removed. There is the warning. -Staff]
MTTANK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It's not growing out here, its developed. Numbers will only continue to skew more the other direction. This is low density acreage lots, and will stay that way for more years than our kids are in school. There is a river on one side of me, and navasota isd on the other. Even the numbers you post look shameful, and they are doctored and guessed by a group that has been so far off its embarrassing. Again, realize its all for nothing. Just trying to fluff some numbers and make some staff and parents at consol happy. Punish my children for living in a more expensive neighborhood with hours more on a bus and splitting them from their community and friends. At least everybody will know going forward they are likely to be punished by the district for paying more taxes, and picking where they see the best fit for their family is.
02skiag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
EVA3
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
02skiag said:

There's too much wrong with your post to properly respond.

He's not wrong.
AggieMom_38
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Be kind. It matters to these kiddos. Please take a breath and just be kind. Everyone knows it matters to these kids - maybe when they look back on it in 10 years, they'll think there are bigger issues in the world. But for now, it matters greatly to them. So please be kind.
Oogway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Those are wise words, and for what it's worth in our case, even though it hasn't been ten years since our family was last rezoned, our children are happy, healthy good students who have thrived and made new friends (although I KNOW they were rolling their eyes on the inside when I said the phrase: "make new friends, but keep the old, one is silver..." you get the idea). In some ways, it made our rapidly growing community smaller because we expanded our circle of people we now know and care for. Probably small consolation to those of you frustrated and concerned right now about the various ways, large and small, it will affect you but being kind is a good motto to have (even though I sometimes have days when it's harder than others!)
EVA3
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
MTTANK said:

They are after the top hoods. They don't care about the distance anyone has to drive, or the students with this entire thing. Just trying to cook the books for the district. My daughter goes to gp elementary area schools that are all right next to each other. I live as far south on wellborn as a man can drive before being in navasota isd. If they get away with what they are trying to pull off, my daughter will be removed from over 80% of the people she grew up with and went to school with when she goes to high school! theres an 80/20 split under any plan other than option 3. When my daughter asks me why in the world we are zoned to a school in a completely different part of the community, how am I supposed to answer? I'm sorry honey, we are being punished for buying an expensive house. The district needs our "demographic", to fluff some numbers and make a problem not look as bad as it is. They want our parent participation and booster club money, so if it makes you feel better we really made consol hs staff and parents happy by wronging you.....


This is spot on. The real tell is how many people live in neighborhoods that won't move under ANY of the options, yet are still adamant about what should happen. Apparently they are extremely concerned about where MY kids should go to school.

Also, the vast majority of the school board will not be affected. Look up where they live.
MTTANK
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Main take away was that they do not want to grandfather any students, bc if they do it blows up the plan. They briefly discussed another school, but got distracted. Talked about looking at drawing from some other neighborhoods to make more sense as far as transportation cost. Hopefully they realize none of the original options are the best answer. I think its silly to be able to see the school and be zoned to another, and really really silly to draw from hoods so far south. They need to shelf it and go back to the drawing board, come up with a plan that fixes student population numbers without making members of the community want to move to another district. Mostly they HAVE to do whats right and be able to grandfather students with new plans.
TaterTot_09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
More like most accurate thing I've heard all day.
lost my dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ignore the "demographics" and the SES stuff - because of the location of the high schools and the center of mass of the school age population, some kids are going to have to drive/get a ride/take the bus to school. If the ISD makes one family happy, they will (I will bet) make another family unhappy.

There is no easy answer. Should we allocate scarce high school slots to those children whose parents yell the loudest? Or how should we do it? (Again, everyone goes to the closest school does not work.)

And "give me what I want and then I don't care" isn't an answer.
DFWag84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Is someone saying that the low SES parents are staying they only want to go to new schools? And that's something we are catering to? Please tell me I misread that.
Oogway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Article in The Eagle regarding the meeting Wednesday night: http://www.theeagle.com/news/local/college-station-school-board-responds-to-boundary-adjustment-concerns/article_210a4f78-09aa-509f-af0a-74cd866aeea5.html

Discusses #s etc, I believe that info will also be at CSISD website for those looking for more info....
LOYAL AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
DFWag84 said:

Is someone saying that the low SES parents are staying they only want to go to new schools? And that's something we are catering to? Please tell me I misread that.
Overall I'm going to bet that the low SES parents aren't saying anything. That's a reality of that demographic, they don't care about education and don't get involved in their kids lives never mind their education. Certainly not universal but bad parenting is a huge cause of the socio-economic problems we have today in poor communities all over the US, why would it be different here?
Stupe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
Quote:

Main take away was that they do not want to grandfather any students, bc if they do it blows up the plan.
According to the link to the Eagle article, it seems that they are taking into account current 8th graders grandfathering.

If they don't allow grandfathering for high school students, it will absolutely prove that their "We want what is best for the kids" line is a bunch of crap and that it's about perception and money.
02skiag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Stupe said:

Quote:

Main take away was that they do not want to grandfather any students, bc if they do it blows up the plan.
According to the link to the Eagle article, it seems that they are taking into account current 8th graders grandfathering.

If they don't allow grandfathering for high school students, it will absolutely prove that their "We want what is best for the kids" line is a bunch of crap and that it's about perception and money.


I agree on this. Someone should have tabled the no-grandfathering idea immediately. I have no issue with either school but I can't imagine sending one of mine to a HS for 1 year and then to a different one the next.
Stupe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
Some of them would be juniors or seniors if they don't allow it.

The original proposal last time was only going to allow sophomores and up to grandfather. Two things that they did correctly during the last fiasco
  • Allowing current freshmen the option to grandfather
  • Allowing non-high students to attend the same school as their siblings if they were current students.

The fact that they weren't going to do that initially and had to be convinced of it was why a lot of people started to question the common sense of that group.
Oogway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I don't have a dog in that fight (grandfathering), but that one shouldn't be too hard in that they can:
1. run the numbers w/100 % staying at current school (seems to be the way most lean) and adjust the options with that in mind.
2. Move all the 8th graders next year instead of giving them the option to wait or option to go early. (Will NOT be popular IMO) reopen the schools for touring again so they can see what it's like.
3. Come up with other options for the younger students (below 8) and add even more portables. One of the parents at the Monday meeting said he didn't mind the crowding, that people weren't complaining about it. That's just one parent, but maybe others agree.
Edit-spelling
Stupe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
S
I just do not understand why they don't table this until the bond hearing. "Projected numbers" are exactly the reason that we are going through this again.
EVA3
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What is the point at which a school is "above capacity?" I have a kid at CSHS and I have not heard one student or parent say anything about its being crowded.
Oogway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Snapshot day maybe? I think there is obviously more to the issue than that, but If CSHS is sorted as a 6A school (which they will eventually be) due to an unadjusted growth but then their numbers get lowered in the middle of that then they will be at a disadvantage w/respect to other schools. If this gets sorted out by fall of 2019 (the next snapshot count for UIL) then they would be more likely to have 5A numbers. Then when the next phase is built, they would grow back up to 2100 (as would Consol) plus according to the demographer.

None of that matters all that much to me, but I am positive there are citizens watching that very closely. CSHS wasn't all that far from being 6A this year, so to have unchecked growth and to be competing against 5A schools (some with way lower enrollment ; remember when Livingston was in this district) will bother some people and have others elated. Although, personally I think they hold up just fine against any school in the State. Not that any of this is something said outside small groups, but some people talk too loudly and I am a rude eavesdropper....
LOYAL AG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here's a question regarding grandfathering. Our daughter is a rising junior who is very active and invested in CSHS. She's earned at least one letter this year, has ordered her letter jacket and can't wait for it to arrive. If she isn't grandfathered what does she do with that jacket? Will there be a program to connect kids being forced to move from CSHS with kids being forced to move from Consol so that they can swap things like letter jackets? Can I sell it on Craigslist?

Yes, it's a silly example and yes it's only a $200 jacket. But it's a $200 jacket that my daughter is extremely proud of because it's hers and only hers from a school she is very emotionally invested in. Looking at the options not one of her friends would be forced to move. I grew up military and attended 10 grade schools. I know what it's like to start over. I got quite good at it having had to do it in the middle of 2nd, middle of 3rd, middle of 5th (twice), before 8th and in the middle of 10th grades. But it's no fun particularly when you haven't ever had to do it. To a 16 year old forcing them to change schools to a campus where they have no friends is not really going to be much different than forcing them to move from one state to another because dad got transferred.

Looking at the CSISD Course Catalog it actually says that kids will attend the HS they are zoned for in the 9th grade. That was apparently important for the district when they issued this catalog because it is literally the fourth sentence in the catalog. Reading into that statement it seems as if they knew at that time it was not right to force kids to move high schools once they had started in one.

However, looking at the policy on setting attendance boundaries their #1 primary consideration is demographic balance and grandfathering is not mentioned at all except in the context of opening a new school. By the way when CSHS was opened it did so without a junior and senior class. Why? Because it didn't seem right to force kids at that point in their academic career to change schools. I honestly think all HS kids should be grandfathered but doing so for juniors and seniors is a start.
veritas47
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The idea of successfully taking Navasota ISD to court to expand the CSISD attendance zones is laughable. Do you really think a judge would force NISD to relinquish valuable property tax dollars that have been zoned for NISD for decades just to appease big money developers and CSISD's need for a greater tax base to fund their perverse love of wasting tax dollars on non-educational purposes? I think that ship has sailed.
AggieMom_38
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The report shows that both schools are at capacity in 2021 (and that's with the very conservative numbers on growth areas - Eagle reported only a couple dozen added in new developments next couple years, but I believe some of those areas are much further along than they were when demographer did their report). But regardless, I just don't understand why we'd rezone now when in two years CSISD HS capacity is at 100% (85% + 110% = 195%). Someone help me understand - if they bond in 2021, doesn't it take 3 years (?) to build a HS? So, both HS will be over capacity for 3 years while they build. We're just moving kids to an under-capacity school now, but the district as a whole is at capacity very soon which means BOTH HS will be over-capacity. I truly must be missing something.
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
veritas47 said:

The idea of successfully taking Navasota ISD to court to expand the CSISD attendance zones is laughable. Do you really think a judge would force NISD to relinquish valuable property tax dollars that have been zoned for NISD for decades just to appease big money developers and CSISD's need for a greater tax base to fund their perverse love of wasting tax dollars on non-educational purposes? I think that ship has sailed.
There's been considerable discussion regarding the geographic constraints College Station and CSISD are under. Their growth is limited in that regard and the day of meeting their limits is approaching.
EBrazosAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
techno-ag said:

veritas47 said:

The idea of successfully taking Navasota ISD to court to expand the CSISD attendance zones is laughable. Do you really think a judge would force NISD to relinquish valuable property tax dollars that have been zoned for NISD for decades just to appease big money developers and CSISD's need for a greater tax base to fund their perverse love of wasting tax dollars on non-educational purposes? I think that ship has sailed.
There's been considerable discussion regarding the geographic constraints College Station and CSISD are under. Their growth is limited in that regard and the day of meeting their limits is approaching.
There will not be a lawsuit about forcing one taxing entity to relinquish tax base to another entity. The can of worms would overwhelm the state court system.......besides being decidedly unconstitutional..... no elected state official would get into this unless they wanted to be ousted from office. Better to spend your time worrying about things you can change or may really happen.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
91_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieMom_38 said:

The report shows that both schools are at capacity in 2021 (and that's with the very conservative numbers on growth areas - Eagle reported only a couple dozen added in new developments next couple years, but I believe some of those areas are much further along than they were when demographer did their report). But regardless, I just don't understand why we'd rezone now when in two years CSISD HS capacity is at 100% (85% + 110% = 195%). Someone help me understand - if they bond in 2021, doesn't it take 3 years (?) to build a HS? So, both HS will be over capacity for 3 years while they build. We're just moving kids to an under-capacity school now, but the district as a whole is at capacity very soon which means BOTH HS will be over-capacity. I truly must be missing something.

IN the presentation, for ALL 4 options they are considering, they are "assuming" that in 2021/2022, they will have a Bond to expand CSHS to be able to hold 2500 students.

They forecast that will be completed for the 2024/2025 school year.

Then in 25/26 another bond will be passed for the 3rd high school which will be completed 3 years after that.

https://1.cdn.edl.io/zWF6cUqAJlkembXMo5lPmA3Y44UuNyk54lA89qoWZs70Y1I2.pdf

Above is the .pdf that shows their projected numbers for all 4 plans and all assume the Bond for CSHS expansion and bond for 3rd high school.

The consider Capacity at 110% of the "Capacity" column.

A&M consolidated has a capacity of 2350 currently, so 110% of that is 2585

CSHS currently has capacity of 1950 (2145)
Expansion for CSHS takes it to over 2500 capacity.

Read the 4 option "projection spreadsheets" with that in mind.

Option 3 actually gets A&M consolidated way over capacity for a longer time.
TAMU1990
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You must take these numbers with a grain of salt. They are just projections, but if you have lived here since the bond passed to build CSHS you know with your own eyes where the growth is. The numbers are wrong for both schools. Using "projected growth" as the primary basis for your decisions will get you into trouble (and we have the 2010 and 2016 rezoning efforts as proof).

Projections from the spring of 2016 to August 2017 were wrong. The demographer had AMCHS at ~1965 and CSHS at ~1865 in August 2017 when the committee's zones went into effect. There was no effect on these numbers from grandfathering - almost all of the kids stayed at their high school an exercised their grandfathering option. It was an even swap - around 100 kids each way stayed. Consol is sitting at ~1675 and CSHS is ~2000 right now.

The board needs to use their common sense- they know where the growth is and what they need to do.
Stop relying exclusively on a demographer who doesn't live here. It is also why grandfathering probably won't be allowed because it pushes everything back a year. When CSHS opened there were kids who left Consol after their freshman year to go to CSHS. There were also families that had kids at both schools too. I do agree that the board needs to just start transportation next school year instead of waiting until August 2019.
Oogway
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wendy, I really don't think moving the current 9-12 is the way to go. They could do it, but I would prefer they look at current 8 on down and reduce those class sizes some and make up the rest with portables etc.
Creekisrising
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Two questions for clarification.

What and when is a bond hearing? It is my understanding a bind is not being considered because of the room at Consol. A decision I agree with because I don't see a way a bond would pass.

For oogway or Wendy. Not which mentioned the 8th graders but I thought they were the issue. The current 9th graders do stay. At the forum it was my understanding that they were talking about incoming 9th graders. Did I miss that?
techno-ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
EBrazosAg said:

techno-ag said:

veritas47 said:

The idea of successfully taking Navasota ISD to court to expand the CSISD attendance zones is laughable. Do you really think a judge would force NISD to relinquish valuable property tax dollars that have been zoned for NISD for decades just to appease big money developers and CSISD's need for a greater tax base to fund their perverse love of wasting tax dollars on non-educational purposes? I think that ship has sailed.
There's been considerable discussion regarding the geographic constraints College Station and CSISD are under. Their growth is limited in that regard and the day of meeting their limits is approaching.
There will not be a lawsuit about forcing one taxing entity to relinquish tax base to another entity. The can of worms would overwhelm the state court system.......besides being decidedly unconstitutional..... no elected state official would get into this unless they wanted to be ousted from office. Better to spend your time worrying about things you can change or may really happen.
Agreed. My point is they are limited in geography and will reach that limit soon, resulting in more angst.
scs01
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EVA3 said:

What is the point at which a school is "above capacity?" I have a kid at CSHS and I have not heard one student or parent say anything about its being crowded.
Capacity at CSHS is 1950, current enrollment 1996. So it's basically at capacity, but soon will need to use portables, etc., to serve the students. The problem is that raising bonds and building schools is done on a time scale of a few to several years. You can't decide you're way over capacity this year, and have a new school on the ground next year to deal with it. CSHS is projected to be far enough over capacity in a couple of years that it would start causing serious problems, thus the board is dealing with it now. If they didn't, then in 2-3 years they would with very high likelihood have to take more drastic rezoning measures than they are now (forget any thought of grandfathering), scramble to have a bond election, etc. So the problem isn't right now, it's with what the board can reasonably predict will happen down the road.
kraut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hendo said:


For oogway or Wendy. Not which mentioned the 8th graders but I thought they were the issue. The current 9th graders do stay. At the forum it was my understanding that they were talking about incoming 9th graders. Did I miss that?
My understanding is that the speakers at Monday's forum were talking about the incoming 9th graders for the 2018-2019 school year. These kids have already registered for the coming fall, but the rezoning being discussed will not be implemented until the 2019-2020 school year. The questions these parents seem to be asking are as follows:

1) Will the incoming freshmen for the 2018-2019 school year be grandfathered? If not,

2) do these incoming 9th graders for the 2018-2019 school year need to go ahead and enroll in the school they will be rezoned to for the 2019-2020 school year?

3) If this rezoning is going to happen and grandfathering not allowed, why spend your freshman year at a school you know you won't be attending for the rest of your high school career?
TAMU1990
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Oogway said:

Wendy, I really don't think moving the current 9-12 is the way to go. They could do it, but I would prefer they look at current 8 on down and reduce those class sizes some and make up the rest with portables etc.
I agree - 8th grade and down only. I would start it immediately and not wait until 2019.

However, it is my understanding that if a So/Jr/Sr at CSHS whose neighborhood was rezoned they could actually choose between the two schools. Obviously, I would expect that number to be very low (a current HS student moving from CSHS to Consol). I think this is where the confusion is coming in.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.