Here's a recap of the meeting:
No preliminary maps were presented, we did more discussion about school priorities, process and covered requests for information. The information pack will be posted on the task force website.
I've expressed concern about the pace of the meetings, given we only have 3 left, before maps are presented to the CACs. That gives us approximately 9-10 hours of worktime left to solve this very complicated problem.
We voted to trust the demographer's data – although it's not entirely perfect, it's close and what we have to work with. (Read this post on population projections.)
We are allowed to ask to break down certain geographic segments. Lisa and I will be asking for those, but the staff wants us as a group to submit those all at one time, because those have to go to the demographer for processing, but those requests were not taken last night.
The other issue that we considered was how to tackle the boundaries. The group voted 10 to 8 to attack the boundary for the new school first, treat it as a draft, THEN begin the process of balancing all of the elementary schools. The new school boundary may be tweaked based on our work in the second phase. The staff said they would give us a "straw" map at the next meeting (November 3) to start on the new elementary school boundaries.
Lisa and I voted against this process, prefering to tackle all schools at once, because we feel that it would treat all schools equally. I suggested we tackle the schools based on tracking patterns, but that went nowhere. The facilitator said we were going to rank the task force priorities, but we never got back to that.
The facilitator asked us to share some of the pressures we are facing - in light of our school's priorities. We shared the results of our parent survey. Here's what the facilitator wrote.
Mills Issues/Pressures
• By a ratio of 7:1, the community has said they do not want to leave Mills
• The middle school boundary line change (affecting the north part of the area) has been particularly difficult
• They are basing their concerns on:
Quality of education
Location
Grandfathering - They are hoping there might be some sort of “Grandfathering” put in place (that was a request submitted tonight) These were the top three issues in our parent survey. See the presentation about the survey results here.
Other schools shared:
Cowan Issues/Pressures
• Their boundaries have changed 2 times in the last 5 years
• They feel they have been through too many changes and too much chaos
• Their numbers are on target currently and on target with the projections provided
Sunset Valley, Patton and Boone all want more students.
If you're keeping track, Kiker, Clayton, and Oak Hill did not share. Oak Hill is currently surveying their parents and plans a meeting October 27 to define their priorities. Visit the Oak Hill boundary blog.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Is there a breakdown on who the 10 v 8 votes were? - Traci
ReplyDeleteI don't think the facilitator tracked it. But I think those against it were: Mills, some of the core members, Clayton and maybe Patton. I guess I should have asked for it to be tracked.
ReplyDeleteTracking the votes -- yes! Ask for them to be tracked as part of this process. No doubt a pattern will emerge that shows alliance that have formed behind the scenes and that votes are being blocked together.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: I read in your Tweets from last night that Kiker currently has 110 kinders from Clayton.
ReplyDeleteWhat is Kiker's popultion level like without those kinders? When they're no longer there next year, will Kiker being looking to add students and if so, how many?
What I've never quite understood was why they couldn't simply redraw lines within CCR to more equitably distribute the students since Kiker has been underenrolled since roughly around the time Clayton opened. I realize that's a simplistic comment, but I wondered it when the issue with the kinder classes came up as well.
ReplyDeleteOh, and YES!! Totally need to track the voting. This was an issue last year as I recall, there being no documentation of what voting actually was. That was why Silva started using the term "supermajority" because no one actually recorded how votes went.
ReplyDeleteMichelle, I'm curious to know why, in sharing the Mills survey results with the Boundary Task Force last night, you stated that Location was ranked as our #2 Priority, but added that it, Location, couldn't be considered. Can you please clarify? Thanks in advance.
ReplyDelete@ Judy and Traci - We're making that request regarding voting.
ReplyDelete@Denise - Read the blog post from yesterday on Location - I try to explain why it could not be applied equally. Also, location is not part of the Boundary Task Force priorities that are to be voted on by the board next Monday. Check out their powerpoint presentation from our first meeting on October 13.
@Judy - I'll post the numbers I have from Kiker, but they are in the packet available on the task force website. (I would add the links, but I can't in comments.)
"I suggested we tackle the schools based on tracking patterns, but that went nowhere."
ReplyDeleteWhy push tracking patterns? It was the lowest priority on the Mills parent survey. I read the post regarding location and understand it may not be a district priority. But it is a Mills priority. I feel like those of us attending Small Middle school should not automatically tracked to a new Elementary school.
Thanks for representing us. Lisa
Lisa,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your input. Tracking was not the lowest priority in the survey. But it did rank well behind other issues, like Quality of Education, Location and Grandfathering.
I am going to respectfully disagree with you. If your neighborhood was being looked at to move to Boone, Cowan or Sunset Valley (which is a possibility, BTW) you feel strongly that tracking is an important issue.
Lisa Chatham and I are trying to represent ALL Mills students. For families at our school, and for the administration, tracking is a big concern. They don't want to see a small section of students split from their peers at Mills, then split again to move to Small. As I recall, tracking was a major issue in last year's middle school boundary decision.
We will try to find a boundary solution that adheres to the priorities Mills parents gave us: Quality of Education and Location. We are also working on a Grandfathering plan. But tracking is something we will/have to prioritize, because it's a stated priority of the Task Force.
Stay tuned!