And the school board won't know if they got the numbers correct until they see the balances of the booster clubs.

viejo said:

---

Wendy 1990 said:

---

Stupe said:

---

1. How do you know who on here has or hasn't done that or some other type of volunteer work for kids in rough situations?

2.The candidate brought race into the discussion.

3. Unless it has changed in the few years since we lived in that area, that is not true. They have the same parties and count downs as ever other school.

4. Do you really think that you are the only person that ventures outside of their street, cul de sac, or neighborhood? Or that everyone that lives in what you consider "rich" neighborhoods always had extra money? Or any money? Or weren't on free / reduced lunch programs at some point?

You seem to be a highly intelligent and caring, but you are starting come across on the forum as if you are the only person that does stuff for kids that don't have much and it's becoming pretentious.

---

I haven't seen any evidence that shows the candidate did bring race in a discussion or a callous manner. Only someone saying stuff on a message board. Green's candidacy was driven by rezoning. If Green wins I think she will be disappointed in the day to day functions of a school board and the headaches public service can bring. Rezoning doesn't happen every year unless people are being elected to bring it up (which I believe is Green's real motive). At least that is the rumor - lack of evidence cuts both ways.

I've seen maps of F&R lunch homes and they are in every neighborhood. Anyone who fosters also has a F&R lunch student. People go in and out of these programs due to many reasons - temporary loss of job, divorce, illness, etc.

There are thousands of volunteers in the Brazos Valley. We are lucky to live in a very giving community.

Maybe I sound pretentious to you, but we shouldn't be a town where in a 5 mile radius there are schools with 80% plus low SES (and everything that entails) vs a HS with $500,000 accounts and Elementary/Intermediate schools with $60K+ fundraisers, with virtually no low SES students. CS is so small we can't zone for location only without creating the above scenario. There also seems to be little concern here with increasing tax burdens to keep building schools out south to avoid moving students in south CS (when schools already on the ground have space). I don't think the community at large supports increasing taxes for that.

Continuity exists for most elementary students because it is the only level where proximity is the main factor in decisions for rezoning. The kids rezoned from AMCHS to CSHS live by A&M. It's not a leisurely walk.

There still haven't been any good arguments against the decisions made this past spring - only the process. The board needs to start future rezoning discussions in the fall and not the spring. I also believe that people seeing the process created confusion and anger in the end. What you saw is what happened in committees behind close doors. Neighborhoods are moved in and out of rezoning possibilities at every meeting. Maybe future boards should "make the sausage" behind close doors, present a map, take recommendations then make a final decision to avoid as much rancor as possible.

---

I find it interesting that the only factor you cite for rezoning is income levels. Why is that? Do income levels of parents dictate the quality of education offered by particular schools? Is there evidence that the educational quality at a high SES school in this community is unequal to that with a low SES percentage? Are the outcomes different?

Schools are here to educate children, not serve as social experiments. Unless someone can prove to me that equalized SES numbers enhances the educational outcomes of ALL students, heck even the SES students, then I won't be convinced that zoning based on SES is a worthwhile idea.

---

• Children from low-SES families enter high school with average literacy skills five years behind those of high-income students (Reardon, Valentino, Kalogrides, Shores, & Greenberg, 2013).Children's initial reading competency is correlated with the home literacy environment, number of books owned, and parent distress (Aikens & Barbarin, 2008; Bergen, Zuijen, Bishop, & Jong, 2016). However, poor households have less access to learning materials and experiences, including books, computers, stimulating toys, skill-building lessons, or tutors to create a positive literacy environment (Bradley, Corwyn, McAdoo, & Garca Coll, 2001; Orr, 2003).
• Children from low-SES families enter high school with average literacy skills five years behind those of high-income students (Reardon, Valentino, Kalogrides, Shores, & Greenberg, 2013).
  
• The school systems in low-SES communities are often underresourced, negatively affecting students' academic progress and outcomes (Aikens & Barbarin, 2008). Inadequate education and increased dropout rates affect children's academic achievement, perpetuating the low-SES status of the community. Improving school systems and early intervention programs may help to reduce some of these risk factors; therefore, increased research on the correlation between SES and education is essential.

https://www.apa.org/pi/ses/resources/publications/education.aspx

To answer your question, yes, income levels of parents can dictate the quality of education. Education starts at home even before they enter into school. This is a very simple and admittedly basic example: As stated above, low income households have less access to learning materials, such as books, computers, etc. It also effects other areas such as volunteers, parent involvement, financial donations, fundraisers, etc. For many low income households, parents hold multiple jobs, just to keep food on the table. When a parent or both parents have multiple jobs, there is less free time, and therefore, a greater opportunity for less parent involvement with the school. When majority of the low-SES students attend one school, that can have a drastic impact on the tools available to the students / teachers. When you have a school that is majority high-SES, there is a much greater chance of more parent involvement, those who can volunteer time, organize fundraisers, have the ability to make financial donations, etc. If the district is unable to financially provide for a certain sport or organization, that financial burden typically falls on the booster club. If you take the above factors into consideration, the 2 schools in the same district, within miles of one another are on very different levels financially, to be able to assist our students.

Stupe said:

---

I don't at all think that your opinion means any less. Your response just seemed like you accepted it and didn't have an issue with it...I was just giving a different perspective. I'm not a single parent either, but I do know several that are that are affected by this and having two kids at different high schools is putting a lot of stress on them.

And it wasn't necessary.

---

We had no choice in the matter and adjusted as best we could. Still burns. I am convinced that the 2018 rezone plan will fail miserably just like the 2016 plan did for the exact same reasons. However, I am willing to let it play out and see if they actually forced the numbers to Consol per their projections.(My money says no)
If they actually accomplish what they intended, then I will accept it and let it go. I can chalk it up to them doing what was best for the majority and I was the minority and all the other happy crap peddled to us about rezoning.
However, if they are wrong then that is another story. Accepted....perhaps but the jury is still out. I look at it more like biding my time.

I do understand your perspective and I recall it from older forums. You are concerned about families at the mid part of town forced to send their kids to the south with no transportation outside of usual school bus times. It limits extracurricular participation and puts them at a disadvantage with non low SES kids. I know a few of those families as well. One mother told me her kids go to the school the bus brings them to which stinks because that young man does not get to attend the same high school for all four years...and why, because he is a low SES child. That about sum up your perspective?

I have always agreed with you that it was unnecessary. The next one will also be unnecessary unless they are opening a 3rd HS. That was my main point. I didn't want to rehash 6 months ago all over again.

You entire post sums up my perspective.

I think that photo is funny.

02skiag said:

---

I think that photo is funny.

---

But probably not the best way to portray yourself when you are running for school board and saying you are the voice for all children

So let me see if I can get this all digested and figured out. A color Facebook screenshot is taken and doctored up, made black and white and darkened to make someone look like they have black face? This is done by "somebody" for some reason of course. Then whoever doctored this photo released it through minority's in the community as well as exterme liberal outlets in Houston and Austin? I think our city is a little smarter than "somebody" thinks. I thought the REAL photo was funny as well, and am tired of all the liberal BS and "outrage" being pushed on everything.

Making a current event into a Halloween costume is NOT RACIST!

So typical these days; can't beat someone with your ideas so scream racist.

These types of strategies will soon prevent smart, qualified, concerned citizens from throwing their hat in the ring of public service. Group think is not my idea of freedom. Amanda decided on her own to run for an office because she saw a need in an area she was passionate about...there was no need "to vet her" because SHE decided to run NOT the "purple and WHITES," an accusation that was so predictable! She's an individual who has her own ideas and decided to implement change by running for a school board seat, as so many of you continuously suggested during rezoning. I guess you then decided she needed to be taken down because her platform was actually more of threat than you bargained for...

Edited for grammar

[This is the last Maroon vs Purple, Poor vs Rich, East vs West post that we are going to remove without giving at least a 30 day ban. That includes race baiting posts. If a rookie name does it again, the name will get banned and the IP will get banned in order to block whoever is using that as a sock.
Posters that can't discuss this without name calling or in an adult manner WILL GET BANNED. -Staff]

The irony of all this is that the people in our black and Hispanic community were rallying behind Amanda for her ideas for increased representation and greater inclusiveness (and being a voice for many ignored by the current board). I heard many comments from the low income parents in our school that this was the "first time" a board member or candidate actually bothered to reach out and engage (and listen!). So who loses in all this? those in our local community that were hoping for support and a voice (not the outraged people in Houston and Austin)

I give credit to "whoever" doctored up that picture and labeled her a racist for waiting until after early voting to do it. If this stunt was pulled before early voting, I don't see the older east side or maroon voting base putting up with this. If you put the ridiculous high school maroon vs purple wars aside, there are some great people of our community on the east side of town. I can promise you if they knew they were being tricked into voting for an extreme liberal, there is no way they would do it. Even if that meant not keeping almost the entire board under maroon reign.

maddiedou said:

---

Making a current event into a Halloween costume is NOT RACIST!

Cut for brevity

---

I disagree. I think it depends upon the context. And since I was not at the party one year ago, I am missing some of the context. I am also white, and I would never presume to tell someone else (no matter their skin color, age, religion, or political persuasion) how they feel about this picture (the undoctored one) as I can only bring to the table my own perceptions and views and those views are no more or less important than anyone else's. I did take away some lessons from this latest wrinkle in the school board race, however, some of which I already knew, some of which I was sad to learn:

1. Social media is a public platform and as such, is not really ever private. Once information is out there in the public realm, be it personal statements, photographs, whatever, any personal control is gone. The context may be relayed in whole or part. It may be true or represented otherwise, but anyone from your next door neighbor to a person halfway across the world will bring their own ideas and agendas; perceptions and persuasions; and use them how they see fit. Anything, be it notes from a school board meeting (subject to FOIA), emails to a colleague, that tweet or snapchat sent in a burst of anger or comedic inspiration is being constantly weighed and assessed by eyes other than your own. That is the world we live in today. This is current. Our children live this everyday as do we all.

2. Like others, I am saddened that there are people who would go to such lengths as to doctor a photo, spread misinformation and disrupt the political process in such a way as it has gone. Neither candidate can control what the public does or does not say or how they act, so accusing supporters of one or the other candidate of condoning such behavior or what the photo means to groups of people reflects poorly on our community as a whole. Blaming groups for the actions of one just recently went through the last national news cycle due to the fellow sending packages through the mail, so let us ALL condemn the behavior of someone who would take an image and alter it as propaganda as not something our community supports. Ms. Green apologized for the image (the original), which was fortunately shown 'as is' in the broadcast on KBTX, and let viewers decide for themselves what they think without the filter portrayed by person(s) unknown. Accusing each other of this or that is going to drive our community further apart. Personally, I try to focus on what the candidates can do for the community that are positives and place that within my own perceptions and realities and understand that not everyone in the community will have those same perceptions.

3. Lastly, in regards to threats, name-calling etc made against Ms. Green; in our current state of affairs, freedom of speech comes with certain restrictions, and there is a line and crossing that line has become only too common. I have seen it and other divisive behavior over a variety of themes, be they religion, politics, skin color, or something as mundane as football games. If Ms. Green is to be a school board trustee, isn't it sad that this is something she will probably have to get used to as the other trustees have been the subject of some pretty harsh rhetoric by the community? No one should be subjected to that simply because you or I disagree with them. Not Ms Green, not Mr. Barrington, not the current or any future trustees. Freedom of speech gives me the right to be disagreeable, , but I try to exercise the right to use a little restraint in my speech when expressing my views.

I hope this latest kerfluffle is not a trend and we can go back to debating different ways to improve this school district.

edit-weird code that for some reason bolded everything. Sorry about that. Thanks for the tip Biobio!

As a Hispanic woman, Green still has my vote. From my seat she is far from racist. It was a Halloween costume. Period. All I see is someone who believes in honoring our country when the Anthem is played. She simply has conservative values. My parents worked hard to instill this was a land of freedoms and opportunity with diverse people and thoughts. They worked hard to get to have these freedoms. So your views are different from mine. Ok. We can still have a common goal. In this case, advocating for ALL children to have the best education CSISD can give. I have seen her in our schools and in our community. From my seat she has come into my community and let me know my voice is important that my children matter. Ive never had anybody ever ask how I feel. Did I have any insight to offer. People said if you want to make a difference, run. She did. Now they're calling her out? What? Now we're trying to sabotage a campaign? I wish I was as brave as Ms Green. I truly believe she will pave a way for new community members to feel comfortable about stepping out and having differing viewpoints on the board and still make CSISD the destination for our community.

Sounds like she's a shoe in for the true Republican voters. Having a sense of humor about the running joke of the NFL doesn't make you a racist but they saw an opportunity and ran with it. Considering the timing and the fact that it's blatantly obvious who might have the motive to doctor that pic makes this a stunt! The fact that it took days of complaining by groups of extremists before KBTX would consider picking it up should say a lot and they report on anything. Shame on whoever photoshopped that picture.

Personally, I prefer to keep the school board races non partisan. I am a Republican, but I respect that not everyone that is instructing and guiding my children or other people's children may not be. I would also prefer that those entrusted with the education and decision making of my children keep their political views in the classroom and in the boardroom (whether they are similar to mine or not) to a strictly professional level that does not interfere with instruction nor policy.

In other words, whether or not I agree with Ms. Green or Mr. Barrington's political views does not determine whether I believe they would make a solid candidate for school board. Others may believe differently. I am thankful we have that choice.

"To answer your question, yes, income levels of parents can dictate the quality of education."

You are confusing quality of education with the outcome of education.

Wendy 1990 said:

---

Green's candidacy was driven by rezoning. If Green wins I think she will be disappointed in the day to day functions of a school board and the headaches public service can bring.

---

Really? This thread was started due to Barrington's strong (only) focus on rezoning and rezoning and... He now has a dissertation on his Facebook page in response to an FC Local question about placing children in "poverty categories" and balancing those out across schools. He unapologetically wants to take comparable composition to a more precise level by looking at types and levels of poverty. This will be fun CSISD!

And I'm thinking that since Barrington hasn't been to a school board meeting for 8 years (including not attending any the past 3 months since the campaign began) nor participated in any CSISD service EVER, that maybe he might be a little disappointed (i.e., unprepared) for day-to-day functions of the board and public service (I don't believe most people would equate consulting with service).

Edit: to clarify who is being quoted

Barrington knows that there is no way he can publicly defend what was done to the incoming freshman, or the 58 group. So he says it should have never happened, and that he can "fix" it by making changes to FC local from happening in the future. FC local did not make the school board screw over those kids, the school boards votes did. FC local is made up by the school board in the first place. They designed it as a way to bypass the community and force their personal agenda in rezoning. The only thing that would "fix" what happened, would be to listen to the community and do whats right as a school board member. If he is being honest and believes these kids should be grandfathered, they still can be. No mention of that though? It's a known fact on this forum I stood behind this group of kids, and none of them were even my own.

I can tell you that Barrington never supported the 58 group in any way. I can tell you that Amanda Green supported all these kids, from BOTH sides.

Amanda Green supported the 58 kids even though her own child was not impacted by rezoning. She felt the Board could do better for ALL the kids of CSISD, so rather than just complain, she elected to do something about it and run.

Personally I feel her experience volunteering in schools, and the fact that our district thought highly enough of her leadership to ask her to serve on their long range planning committee and also rezoning committee speaks volumes. I want someone on my school board who has feet on the ground interaction with parents, teachers, students, administrators. Green has done this for 13 years. Barrington has not.

I firmly believe that the Board decision to not grandfather the 8th graders only exacerbated community divisions.

My sense was that those in neighborhoods affected by rezoning, while they were not thrilled about new attendance boundaries and disruption, would have accepted it with less rancor if the board would have compromised on grandfathering the 8th graders. Definitely a missed opportunity in my view.

I was involved in every single public function personally, and he was not present. yesiamnew, I want you to know that yesiamNOTNEW and have posted on more things than just barrington. Again, my involvement is well documented in this forum. He never even posted on the FB page in support, or wrote the eagle, or even had one of his buddies from another state write to the eagle about it. If you really want to know, you should tee him up and ask him about it yourself. I'm sure you will get a sixty two paragraph response with no real answer, or a half wit excuse. There is plenty of evidence everywhere of Amanda Green being involved, beyond my personal eyewitness. barrington on the other hand?????

I'm new poster on TexAgs but have read it for years. No need to be rude. I only asked for proof to back up your statement which was rather harsh...but then again so was your response to me.