That's not what he said. He clearly infered that it negatively affected folks. He's saying it's possible they got the numbers correct.
viejo said: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?Wendy 1990 said: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.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'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.
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.
To your first reply about me not being a single parent and my opinion is less valued, I am happily married for 17 years.Stupe said:So outside of the people that got blindsided by a fixed and rushed process, they did a good job? After they said that rezoning was done during the last one just two years ago?Quote:
I am one of those families.
What I was referencing is aimed at rezoning again. Let me clarify, if their is no need to rezone until the third HS is due to be built then I would say they "got it right." (at the expense of those in Creek Meadows and the 58.) If we put the community through this again before we need to expand a 3rd HS then I would not say they "got it rght."
They knew all along what the final map was going to be and didn't release it until after the only public hearing so they wouldn't have to hear from the people that you are referencing. How in the world is that doing a good job?
1.) The board should not allow housing values to influence what is right for kids.Turf96 said:
I believe if you try that you will see the property market tank. It is already on a bubble why would you want to shove it over the edge? Why wouldn't you just zone every new development to consol and leave as many kids displaced as you can?
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)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.
But probably not the best way to portray yourself when you are running for school board and saying you are the voice for all children02skiag said:
I think that photo is funny.
maddiedou said:
Making a current event into a Halloween costume is NOT RACIST!
Cut for brevity
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!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.
Can you back these statements up with proof, please?MTTANK said:
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.