The board got it wrong today. They are doing a disservice to all students in this district. Not to mention this is a lot of bad press for College Station lately. My advice for anyone looking to move to the area or build a home here would be that you DO NOT have the right to choose your residence based on proximity to schools. Hard lesson to learn for many and we have the school board to thank for taking that right away. As soon as the ses or comparability numbers start to tip the scales again they will rezone again and again so that the numbers fit into the acceptable range they decided on. No neighborhood is safe. FC Local gives them the ability to do this. The board had a chance to make this half right but they stand by their decisions, unapologetically. Laughter from the board after their decision not to consider grandfathering kids days away from being in high school speaks poorly on their character and shows lack of compassion. No one can argue that. I can't feel good about people like them having so much control when they should be protecting and nurturing these kids. So sorry these kids are the ones affected by such poor planning by such educated adults.

FYI you cannot rationalize to a kid that they need to toughen up and make new friends and simply choose to get over it. Not every personality is equipped to handle such a big disruption like this. We can only hope this won't have long lasting psychological effects for these students.

The Board got it wrong weeks ago. Today they just confirmed that it was not about the kids at all. There was absolutely no reason not to grandfather the 8th grade kids affected by their decisions. Absolutely none.

I have no direct dog in this fight, but there's the right thing to do and the way the board is choosing. Its a travesty.

Same here.

This entire process has been an insult to the residents of this district.

Based on the 240+ comments - we have a school board that has made a decision with malicious intent and the emotional well being of children are at stake.

I guess the next step is to determine what, if any legal action can be taken?

I don't think it's malicious in the sense that they are trying to hurt the students. It just seems like they don't care as long as the numbers look good.

InMyOpinion said:

---

Based on the 240+ comments - we have a school board that has made a decision with malicious intent and the emotional well being of children are at stake.

I guess the next step is to determine what, if any legal action can be taken?

---

From the people that I've talked to, these options are what some are considering

- An injunction concerning the entire rezoning
- An injunction concerning grandfathering and siblings
- A possible recall and special election

Personally, I think that a recall and special election for any elected governing body should only be done if there has been a serious violation of law or trust. I wouldn't spearhead something like that, but I can see where some find it valid in this case.

I don't have a dog in this fight and haven't read all the previous posts but I was wondering why it is so important for the 8th graders to be grandfathered in? Is it just because the 8th grade student expected to attend a certain school? Being retired military our child attended 9 different schools and never had an adjustment problem. Even in the 1970's when my city was desegregated I was bussed over 9 miles to the historical black junior high in 9th grade and then the next 3 years at the historical black high school. The newer white high school was less than 3 miles from my home. As a student I don't remember it being a problem at all changing schools. We had friends at both schools and wasn't a big deal! So I don't really understand why this is a big deal! I get the district trying to make full use of the facilities and as a taxpayer with no student I appreciate that! As new schools are added rezoning will always have to be addressed! Although I would like to understand why everyone seems to think a disservice is being done to the 8th graders and maybe I will too! I feel like I'm missing something!

Serving the board is a thankless job, and you can't always please everyone. Maybe one of the people mad enough will have the guts to run for office.
Good Luck!

From what I'm reading, these 240 comments are really just the same few people commenting. back and forth. I think you'd be really surprised just how many actually support the Board's decisions.

The same could be said for all of the comments for the other side as well. Judging by the room full of people at the work shop you might be surprised to know how many people were there supporting the 8th graders don't even have kids that are affected.

Some of y'all need to go back and read this entire thread with a blind eye from your own bias. This school board is doing what it feels best for the school district they serve. YOU voted them in. THEY are doing their job. Criticize, that's fine. I agree the timing was pretty tough, but they are doing their job.

BUT, to cry foul and that they are malicious or self serving or that their entire premise here was to hurt "58" kids, well that's a little far fetched. Some would say your throwing accusations out there with no proof, I've seen much less get deleted on this board than what some of you have insinuated.

Of the "250 comments" on this thread that "support" the position some of you speak of, over half of them are from the same 10 people. You're asking the board to do their job, they did, you just don't agree with it.

It sucks, I get it. But there are some in this whole thing that sound, how should I say it? Childish? I'm not calling anyone particular out but you have to understand when someone who has no dog in this hunt reads these comments it comes across as hard to swallow when you're being asked to be taken serious with the "concerns".

I fully expect this post to get flagged because there are some on here that flag everything I say, but please go back and read these comments in an unbiased setting. It just comes across, catty and bratty.

I'm trying to figure out why folks don't want to help a few kids affected by the abhorrent timing of the board's decision.

gibby, normally I would say the same about posters here. But in this particular case the board made an awful decision that directly and personally affects a relatively small group of students in a very negative way. What's the harm in trying to make it right? You can even do it without setting a precedent. This didn't have to go this way.

Nom de Plume said:

---

I'm trying to figure out why folks don't want to help a few kids affected by the abhorrent timing of the board's decision.

---

Because they are trying to figure out how moving 58 kids to a different school will crush their dreams and psyche. That's what people are saying, that their students lives will be destroyed. I bet these parents have more ability to parent than letting that happen.

It sucks, I get it. Doesn't mean anybody should "cave in" to someone else's demands. In my opinion.

I don't disagree Nom, the timing has been real crappy. But I would venture you, like me, have had to deal with some very crappy situations in our lives because of timing. In the long run it will be ok. I think that's the one thing a lot of people from the "other side" view it. People will disagree with that but yet again, it doesn't make anybody wrong either.

I think it's a big deal if a kid has tried out and become a part of a group they now don't have the opportunity to be a part of simply because of poor timing by grown folks running the district.

That's kinda crappy, especially when there's a fix.

But yes, the kids will survive. Which I guess is the litmus test used by the board.

Nom De Plume

The students that tried out for cheer, band or other athletic sports will still be able to participate should they decide to remain at the school they are currently zoned for. When they have to change schools for their sophomore year, they can then try out for the same things at the new school.

Because all elected officials make choices based on their good morals and the good of all people. For the board to say they have listened to every complaint from supporters of grandfathering and agree that they are very valid complaints yet in the same breath dismiss those "valid complaints" and then say it was what's best for them is like giving a back handed compliment. But it's their job so that makes it ok. You were right when you said "we" are the ones that voted them in, that's your way of shifting the blame off the board. I do think one good thing came out of this debacle and that's the awareness it has brought to certain policies the board uses. I'd be willing to bet that people will be paying more attention the next time it's time to vote on who they want to elect.

When we first moved to CS six years ago, my oldest daughter was a junior and my other daughter was a freshman. We were zoned for CSHS, which had just opened for freshman and sophomores. My oldest daughter had to enroll at Consol, but my other daughter was allowed to "grandfather" to be able to attend Consol as well, which was her choice. Both my daughters played soccer at Consol and loved every aspect about their school.

If this scenario had taken place this fall, I would have one daughter at Consol and one at CSHS. Now my wife and I would have to choose to either watch one daughter play or split up and each of us take turns watching a different daughter in a different city - until the teams played each other. We would have transportation issues getting the younger daughter to school and back from practices and other functions. My daughters are very close - I would hate to think what effect splitting them between rival schools would have had on them. We would have likely chosen to send them both to a private school instead.

There are families in this exact situation right now. The grandfathering policy six years ago was a great solution for us. This is not about which school is better - my son goes to CSHS now and loves it. This is not about numbers, it is about families. If the board is going to act strictly on numbers and not take into account the effect on families, why do we even need a board? Just plug numbers into a computer and that will be that.

The board got this wrong, and they deserve to hear about it.

As has been said, I have no dog in this fight except I am a tax payer...

Redistricting is a way of life, given growth and changing demographics. For those involved I am sorry you are inconvenienced, but having lived in CS for over 30 years and we have sent two children through CISD my family has been through the process many times (and survived!). Both high schools in CS are great so the choice of the school should not be a problem. Kids will make friends quickly and will grow stronger from the experience.

On the flip side we must use our resources wisely. The alternative is to add portables to one high school and leave another not fully occupied. Portables are not the best learning (and safety) environment for young teens.

My 2 cents

Samantha Baker said:

---

From what I'm reading, these 240 comments are really just the same few people commenting. back and forth. I think you'd be really surprised just how many actually support the Board's decisions.

---

Why do you support the board on this (the grandfathering issue - this is NOT about the new boundary maps)? The board refuses to provide their rationale (except some vague "it's the numbers" which it can't be given the actual numbers). The only one now being offered (about sitting on tables at CSHS) is laughable I assumed the board member that said it actually meant it to be funny, given it's not anywhere close to the truth. With all due respect, please let us know your reasoning. It's not capacity numbers and it's not bonding - they remain unaffected . Unless you want to straight out lie about the numbers, it can't be about that. So please let us know your reasoning and the other people that have blue starred this person's post, what is your reason for supporting the board over these kids? I believe this group is very willing to try and understand and learn. What is the benefit that makes it worth the cost to these kids? At this point, I can only assume you have something personally against these particularly kids being affected.

doubledog said:

---

On the flip side we must use our resources wisely. The alternative is to add portables to one high school and leave another not fully occupied. Portables are not the best learning (and safety) environment for young teens.

My 2 cents

---

CSISD owns the portables. And, they're going to be used at CSHS (I believe they're already there) because this group of 56-58 kids has NO effect on CSHS capacity (I know, I'm being repetitive, but people appear to remain confused). And, portables are also currently being used at several elementary schools but maybe your comment is that you believe they're safe for K-4th just not for young teens. I don't know the research on portable safety.

Edit to add: agree about resources (I also don't have a dog in this fight and do care as a taxpayer). I care about the extra $100,000 spent on transportation as well as all the extra admin/teacher/counselor time spent to redo all this for these handful of kids, the cost for the upcoming planned events to socialize these kids, etc.. Actually, I only see ADDED cost due to this decision. Wow!

cajunken said:

---

When we first moved to CS six years ago, my oldest daughter was a junior and my other daughter was a freshman. We were zoned for CSHS, which had just opened for freshman and sophomores. My oldest daughter had to enroll at Consol, but my other daughter was allowed to "grandfather" to be able to attend Consol as well, which was her choice. Both my daughters played soccer at Consol and loved every aspect about their school.

If this scenario had taken place this fall, I would have one daughter at Consol and one at CSHS. Now my wife and I would have to choose to either watch one daughter play or split up and each of us take turns watching a different daughter in a different city - until the teams played each other. We would have transportation issues getting the younger daughter to school and back from practices and other functions. My daughters are very close - I would hate to think what effect splitting them between rival schools would have had on them. We would have likely chosen to send them both to a private school instead.

There are families in this exact situation right now. The grandfathering policy six years ago was a great solution for us. This is not about which school is better - my son goes to CSHS now and loves it. This is not about numbers, it is about families. If the board is going to act strictly on numbers and not take into account the effect on families, why do we even need a board? Just plug numbers into a computer and that will be that.

The board got this wrong, and they deserve to hear about it.

---

This is me. Wrote a letter to the board and the supe, maybe I will hear an answer. Maybe they addressed it at the meeting yesterday? Either way, I should be grateful my kids are getting a quality taxpayer-funded education with good comparability and a reasonable bus ride and I get to experience both fantastic high schools at the same time. Feels wonderful.

I don't have a dog in this fight. I don't have kids in school and am not apart of the district. I don't think the board got it right. Timing was terrible and the hurt and anxiety this whole thing caused is sad. With that being said, I think the students, while needing some adjustment time will ultimately be fine. They won't lose any friends, in fact, some friendships will probably grow stronger. I will pray for all the students and families that are affected that they will ultimately find peace in this decision.

AggieMom_38 said:

---

Samantha Baker said:

---

From what I'm reading, these 240 comments are really just the same few people commenting. back and forth. I think you'd be really surprised just how many actually support the Board's decisions.

---

Why do you support the board on this (the grandfathering issue - this is NOT about the new boundary maps)? The board refuses to provide their rationale (except some vague "it's the numbers" which it can't be given the actual numbers). The only one now being offered (about sitting on tables at CSHS) is laughable I assumed the board member that said it actually meant it to be funny, given it's not anywhere close to the truth. With all due respect, please let us know your reasoning. It's not capacity numbers and it's not bonding - they remain unaffected . Unless you want to straight out lie about the numbers, it can't be about that. So please let us know your reasoning and the other people that have blue starred this person's post, what is your reason for supporting the board over these kids? I believe this group is very willing to try and understand and learn. What is the benefit that makes it worth the cost to these kids? At this point, I can only assume you have something personally against these particularly kids being affected.

---

First off, I don't recall saying what my position was. I simply said I'm hearing chatter around town that there are many in favor of the Board and the decisions made. It is my opinion after reading comments on TexAgs and scanning other social media, it is the same few people that seem to be in an uproar because their child is being rezoned.

gibby03 said:

---

I'll bow out now because honestly, my post will be deleted by morning time. That's just what happens on here when I say something but hopefully enough people read my post above before it's deleted. I just wanted to say how someone outside of it sees the situation and what's been going on here on this thread.

---

Good grief. There are a bunch of differentiating opinion on this thread and staff left them up just like they have on the other rezoning thread.
It is difficult to take an adult seriously when they play that card too often.

I've had posts on either this thread or the other about rezoning deleted....I'm not sure which one... and it wasn't because of my opinion, it was because me and another poster started getting too personal toward each other the entire exchange got deleted.
You don't see...or read...me whining about it.

Give your "woe is me" attitude a rest and it would be a lot easier to take you seriously.

Quote:

---

Some of y'all need to go back and read this entire thread with a blind eye from your own bias.

---

Take your own advice and see if there are only posts from one side on either thread.

I sure how the 58 kids aren't as fragile as the adults on this board.

Samantha Baker said:

---

First off, I don't recall saying what my position was. I simply said I'm hearing chatter around town that there are many in favor of the Board and the decisions made. It is my opinion after reading comments on TexAgs and scanning other social media, it is the same few people that seem to be in an uproar because their child is being rezoned.

---

Its not just a handful of people that are for grandfathering these students. I have been very passionate about grandfathering these kids, and I do not have an 8th grade kid or any kids even affected by the HS rezoning. I have not met a single real life person thats against it, actually. To clear things up, instead of scanning social media listen to the school board workshps. They said they got hundreds of emails from both sides of the rezoning issue all saying they were for the grandfathering. They then said they only had one single email from someone against grandfathering incoming freshman, and that one email was referring to the bands booster club at consol needing money from these incoming freshman's parents. Then they voted against grandfathering these incoming freshman anyway, despite the unanimous outcry from the public.