Thursday, December 31, 2009
Sort of Schools East Of Mopac/West Of 35
Many of you who attended today's meeting wanted to see this spreadsheet. These numbers are from AISD the numbers to the far right are the permanent capacity numbers for each school along with the capacity percentage for 2010-2011.
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Meeting, DECEMBER 31 at 1pm
We will hold a meeting December 31 at 1pm at Mills Elementary in the cafeteria for Mills parents only. Mrs. Butler and the Mills boundary reps will answer questions and give some details for speaking at the community meeting that will be held on January 5 at 6:00 at Clayton Elementary. We do not have a paper copy of the newest map, called Plan 2, but it can be found here.
Here are the capacity numbers from the Plan 2 map.
Here are the capacity numbers from the Plan 2 map.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
FUBTF Meeting, December 15
The meeting tonight was a complete nightmare. The process changed, the numbers changed and the boundaries changed - dramatically. Neither Lisa and I voted for the map that will go out to the community on January 5. We would have made other changes, but were outvoted by the task force. There will be no meeting Thursday. The next meeting will be held January 5 at Clayton.
First, the numbers
Why are the population projections changing so much? (Mills is up 8% overall.) The demographer says, "my philosophy has changed, I'm willing to accept reality." Dr. Harner has in the past underprojected the 5 year numbers for Mills and he says he's adjusted his models to incorporate the fact that families are choosing to move into the Mills area because of the housing type and the good schools. I've got more details, but that's the gist.
Key Vote Early On
After the first break, a core member brought up that the schools on the east side of Mopac have a unique issue with underenrollment that is pervasive in that entire area. The task force member moved to "leave Sunset Valley, Boone and Cowan at their existing boundaries" and ask the board to call a special boundary task force of schools in that area to address the issues of underenrollment. The measure was defeated 12 to 11. Lisa and I voted for it. That set the stage for what happened late in the meeting.
Second, the process
In past boundary meetings, we have gone by school in a particular order. Tonight, they changed the order, and Mills was asked to go 2nd, which put us in a situation we weren't completely prepared for. We were waiting for the Clayton and Oak Hill to decide what they were going to do first (which is the way things usually work.)
We proposed three options: Sending Loma Vista (and Estates) to the SWES, which was voted down by the task force. Sending Loma Vista (and Estates) to Clayton, which was voted down by the task force. Sending Circle C North to Kiker, which was approved by the task force. That puts Kiker at 105% or 853 students (based on the 5 year projections, which Kiker felt was a little high, but they were willing to accept to help us out).
Once that was approved, AISD staff told us that Mills would be at 108% and we moved on to discussing another piece. Then, staff came back and said, no, that Mills was actually at 112%. But we were not allowed at that time to address that issue. We were told we would "get back to it."
At the end of the evening, Boone was the last school to go and proposed to take sections 96H3 and 96A2 to Boone. We spoke calmly against the proposal, mentioning the tracking, the fact that it would take too many kids out of Mills, the fact that we had petitions against the move, and other issues. However, while Lisa and I voted against it, we were outvoted by the rest of the task force. Then, we were asked to vote on whether that map goes to the public. We also voted against taking the map to the community, but we were outvoted. In fact, the task force refused to even discuss the merits/challenges of the map, which I find particularly troubling.
So the map that will go to the community is not a map we support, nor voted for.
Third, the boundaries
At the end of this, we had 96F1, 96F2, 96E moving to Kiker, 96H3 &96A2 moving to Boone.(96H2A stays at Mills)
I don't have the final numbers - only the five year projections for 2014-2015, which we were asked to use during this meeting. The map that will go out to the community, January 5, is a Frankenstein. As soon as I have the map, I'll post it. For now, here are FIVE YEAR numbers compared to the permanent capacity of the school:
We never intended for Kiker to be larger than Mills. Never wanted Mills to be that small. The staff forced us to make changes in a vacuum without looking at the larger picture and then the core members outvoted us when we wanted to go back and adjust things.
You may think that Lisa and I can make reasonable arguments, and that the task force will listen, but I think this plan is a great example of how little say we really have.
I will remind you not to attack any one person on the blog. Please don't disparage any school. These comments are being looked at very closely and are being used as evidence that we have bias against certain schools, when clearly we just want to keep existing tracking patterns intact. Be nice, Lisa and I are working very hard and are very frustrated.
First, the numbers
Why are the population projections changing so much? (Mills is up 8% overall.) The demographer says, "my philosophy has changed, I'm willing to accept reality." Dr. Harner has in the past underprojected the 5 year numbers for Mills and he says he's adjusted his models to incorporate the fact that families are choosing to move into the Mills area because of the housing type and the good schools. I've got more details, but that's the gist.
Key Vote Early On
After the first break, a core member brought up that the schools on the east side of Mopac have a unique issue with underenrollment that is pervasive in that entire area. The task force member moved to "leave Sunset Valley, Boone and Cowan at their existing boundaries" and ask the board to call a special boundary task force of schools in that area to address the issues of underenrollment. The measure was defeated 12 to 11. Lisa and I voted for it. That set the stage for what happened late in the meeting.
Second, the process
In past boundary meetings, we have gone by school in a particular order. Tonight, they changed the order, and Mills was asked to go 2nd, which put us in a situation we weren't completely prepared for. We were waiting for the Clayton and Oak Hill to decide what they were going to do first (which is the way things usually work.)
We proposed three options: Sending Loma Vista (and Estates) to the SWES, which was voted down by the task force. Sending Loma Vista (and Estates) to Clayton, which was voted down by the task force. Sending Circle C North to Kiker, which was approved by the task force. That puts Kiker at 105% or 853 students (based on the 5 year projections, which Kiker felt was a little high, but they were willing to accept to help us out).
Once that was approved, AISD staff told us that Mills would be at 108% and we moved on to discussing another piece. Then, staff came back and said, no, that Mills was actually at 112%. But we were not allowed at that time to address that issue. We were told we would "get back to it."
At the end of the evening, Boone was the last school to go and proposed to take sections 96H3 and 96A2 to Boone. We spoke calmly against the proposal, mentioning the tracking, the fact that it would take too many kids out of Mills, the fact that we had petitions against the move, and other issues. However, while Lisa and I voted against it, we were outvoted by the rest of the task force. Then, we were asked to vote on whether that map goes to the public. We also voted against taking the map to the community, but we were outvoted. In fact, the task force refused to even discuss the merits/challenges of the map, which I find particularly troubling.
So the map that will go to the community is not a map we support, nor voted for.
Third, the boundaries
At the end of this, we had 96F1, 96F2, 96E moving to Kiker, 96H3 &96A2 moving to Boone.(96H2A stays at Mills)
I don't have the final numbers - only the five year projections for 2014-2015, which we were asked to use during this meeting. The map that will go out to the community, January 5, is a Frankenstein. As soon as I have the map, I'll post it. For now, here are FIVE YEAR numbers compared to the permanent capacity of the school:
We never intended for Kiker to be larger than Mills. Never wanted Mills to be that small. The staff forced us to make changes in a vacuum without looking at the larger picture and then the core members outvoted us when we wanted to go back and adjust things.
You may think that Lisa and I can make reasonable arguments, and that the task force will listen, but I think this plan is a great example of how little say we really have.
I will remind you not to attack any one person on the blog. Please don't disparage any school. These comments are being looked at very closely and are being used as evidence that we have bias against certain schools, when clearly we just want to keep existing tracking patterns intact. Be nice, Lisa and I are working very hard and are very frustrated.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Changes in Demographic Numbers
Believe me, I don't want to tell you this anymore than you want to hear it.
The demographer's numbers for Mills have changed. We are bigger than projected, as many of us suspected. This means that another neighborhood will be moved from Mills. (Believe me, Lisa and I would have much rather gone with Plan 1 and called it a day. But that door is about to close.)
**ANY neighborhood we move from Mills is within walking or biking distance - and will be asked to get on a bus to go to a neighboring school** There is nothing we can do about this.
Here are the numbers for Plan 1, the first chart shows the numbers we've been working with. And the second chart shows the revised numbers.
Please understand that Lisa and I will be working with the other representatives on the task force to come up with a solution. We heard your priorities during the last CAC meeting as to which schools are preferable. We will do our best to find a solution you will support.
Why the change in the numbers? I recieved an email from Joe Silva explaining some of the rational behind the changes. It occured when the demographer, Dr. Harner, began to divide up sections of the Mills attendance area. Here's the explanation from Joe:
Dr. Harner was making adjustments to the overall population due to an increase in Kindergarten students. His earlier projections were based on a decrease in K students from 183 in 2007 to 165 in 2008. His projection was that there would be approximately the same number of students in 2009. However, the number of K students actually increased to 184. So he has adjusted his projection for future students.
The FUBTF was told that we would be receiving updated population projections in November. Because each year Dr. Harner uses current membership data (kids actually at the school) and readjusts the population projections. Updated numbers were expected, but the amount of change was surprising.
The demographer's numbers for Mills have changed. We are bigger than projected, as many of us suspected. This means that another neighborhood will be moved from Mills. (Believe me, Lisa and I would have much rather gone with Plan 1 and called it a day. But that door is about to close.)
**ANY neighborhood we move from Mills is within walking or biking distance - and will be asked to get on a bus to go to a neighboring school** There is nothing we can do about this.
Here are the numbers for Plan 1, the first chart shows the numbers we've been working with. And the second chart shows the revised numbers.
Please understand that Lisa and I will be working with the other representatives on the task force to come up with a solution. We heard your priorities during the last CAC meeting as to which schools are preferable. We will do our best to find a solution you will support.
Why the change in the numbers? I recieved an email from Joe Silva explaining some of the rational behind the changes. It occured when the demographer, Dr. Harner, began to divide up sections of the Mills attendance area. Here's the explanation from Joe:
Dr. Harner was making adjustments to the overall population due to an increase in Kindergarten students. His earlier projections were based on a decrease in K students from 183 in 2007 to 165 in 2008. His projection was that there would be approximately the same number of students in 2009. However, the number of K students actually increased to 184. So he has adjusted his projection for future students.
The FUBTF was told that we would be receiving updated population projections in November. Because each year Dr. Harner uses current membership data (kids actually at the school) and readjusts the population projections. Updated numbers were expected, but the amount of change was surprising.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
CAC Survey Results
December 10, 2009
So far, we've collected 70 surveys from last week's CAC meeting. The surveys broke down into 2 parts:
1) On a scale of 1-10, how well does Plan 1 meet the criteria set by the Mills' parents feedback from September?
Of the 70 surveys, 62 responses gave Plan 1 a rating of 8, 9 or 10.
88.5% felt positive about the plan.
2 people rated the plan a 7
5 people gave Plan 1 a rating between 3-5. As a whole, these negative responses asked for additional relief for Mills.
2)"If demographic numbers change and Mills must find additional relief, please indicate which neighboring school you would prefer to attend."
52 people chose Kiker Elementary
6 chose Patton
2 chose Clayton
1 chose Oak Hill
1 chose the New elementary school
Lisa and I have been notified by the district that all FUBTF members will be receiving updated demographic numbers and maps on Friday (tomorrow.) Stay tuned.
So far, we've collected 70 surveys from last week's CAC meeting. The surveys broke down into 2 parts:
1) On a scale of 1-10, how well does Plan 1 meet the criteria set by the Mills' parents feedback from September?
Of the 70 surveys, 62 responses gave Plan 1 a rating of 8, 9 or 10.
88.5% felt positive about the plan.
2 people rated the plan a 7
5 people gave Plan 1 a rating between 3-5. As a whole, these negative responses asked for additional relief for Mills.
2)"If demographic numbers change and Mills must find additional relief, please indicate which neighboring school you would prefer to attend."
52 people chose Kiker Elementary
6 chose Patton
2 chose Clayton
1 chose Oak Hill
1 chose the New elementary school
Lisa and I have been notified by the district that all FUBTF members will be receiving updated demographic numbers and maps on Friday (tomorrow.) Stay tuned.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Recap CAC December 2 Meeting
Thanks for everyone who came last night to the CAC Meeting and the District Presentation of Plan 1. (See a map of Plan 1 on the FUBTF Website.)
We heard last night that a majority of parents support Plan 1. That's great - we're glad we've met your priority list. However, it's important that you know, the process is not complete.
As you heard from Mrs. Butler and the District Staff, new demographic projections regarding how many students are expected to attend Mills over the next five years are expected to be presented to the FUBTF this month. IF the demographic numbers are higher than we are seeing under Plan 1, Mills may be forced to move additional students. We won't know what the numbers will look like until they are presented to us. (When they are released, I will post them here.)
That's why we asked parents and CAC members to fill out a Survey Options form - which gathered feedback on Plan 1: How well does Plan 1 fit the priority list developed from the Parent Survey September 15? The survey also asked parents who live in various geographic areas to pick a school they would prefer to move their children to - if we are forced to make a move by new developing demographic numbers. These surveys will be available in the front office this week. Please, one per person.
As I said last night - Lisa and I have been studying overcrowding at Mills for more than a year, we have been open and honest about the process and have solicited input from Mills administration and parents at EVERY step. We are VERY familiar with the negatives of moving ANY neighborhood from Mills, because we are such a small geographic area. We appreciate your concerns. But we would also like you to appreciate ours. If we are forced to move another neighborhood from Mills, we would prefer to know where you would like to go, instead of the constant drumbeat of "we don't want to go." We understand. No one wants to go, but we may be FORCED to make that decision, depending on the numbers.
The FUBTF meets again December 15, with a meeting possibly on the 17th as well. Happy Holidays!
I have reenabled comments on the blog, but I do so with some caution. Here are the groundrules: No comments should be directed at anyone personally - no mention of any one person or one person's actions. Please keep the discussion civil and fact-based. And, as my momma always said, if you don't have something nice to say, well, it might be best to keep it to yourself. Or at least don't post it here for the world to see. People beyond Mills are reading the blog, including our administration and the district staff.
I'll post survey results here as they come in.
Now, go get ready for snow!
We heard last night that a majority of parents support Plan 1. That's great - we're glad we've met your priority list. However, it's important that you know, the process is not complete.
As you heard from Mrs. Butler and the District Staff, new demographic projections regarding how many students are expected to attend Mills over the next five years are expected to be presented to the FUBTF this month. IF the demographic numbers are higher than we are seeing under Plan 1, Mills may be forced to move additional students. We won't know what the numbers will look like until they are presented to us. (When they are released, I will post them here.)
That's why we asked parents and CAC members to fill out a Survey Options form - which gathered feedback on Plan 1: How well does Plan 1 fit the priority list developed from the Parent Survey September 15? The survey also asked parents who live in various geographic areas to pick a school they would prefer to move their children to - if we are forced to make a move by new developing demographic numbers. These surveys will be available in the front office this week. Please, one per person.
As I said last night - Lisa and I have been studying overcrowding at Mills for more than a year, we have been open and honest about the process and have solicited input from Mills administration and parents at EVERY step. We are VERY familiar with the negatives of moving ANY neighborhood from Mills, because we are such a small geographic area. We appreciate your concerns. But we would also like you to appreciate ours. If we are forced to move another neighborhood from Mills, we would prefer to know where you would like to go, instead of the constant drumbeat of "we don't want to go." We understand. No one wants to go, but we may be FORCED to make that decision, depending on the numbers.
The FUBTF meets again December 15, with a meeting possibly on the 17th as well. Happy Holidays!
I have reenabled comments on the blog, but I do so with some caution. Here are the groundrules: No comments should be directed at anyone personally - no mention of any one person or one person's actions. Please keep the discussion civil and fact-based. And, as my momma always said, if you don't have something nice to say, well, it might be best to keep it to yourself. Or at least don't post it here for the world to see. People beyond Mills are reading the blog, including our administration and the district staff.
I'll post survey results here as they come in.
Now, go get ready for snow!
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
CAC December 2 Meeting
Hi everyone,
I just got off the phone with Beth Wilson, with AISD's Planning Staff. She advised us to solicit feedback on Plan 1 only, because all the other schools had solicited feedback on that one plan. (Plan 1 is the plan voted by the Boundary Task Force on November 18.) The District would like all the schools to be consistent in the feedback they receive.
No alternative plans or options will be presented or talked about at the meeting Wednesday. Comment cards will be limited to feedback on Plan 1 at this time, with parents and CAC members being asked how well the plan fits within the priorities voted on by the Mills parents in September. District officials will be on hand to answer any questions you might have about Plan 1.
Want to take a look at Plan 1? Go to the Task Force Website and look under the November 18th agenda.
The CAC meeting is Wednesday, December 2 at 5:30 in the Mills cafeteria.
We'll see you there!
I just got off the phone with Beth Wilson, with AISD's Planning Staff. She advised us to solicit feedback on Plan 1 only, because all the other schools had solicited feedback on that one plan. (Plan 1 is the plan voted by the Boundary Task Force on November 18.) The District would like all the schools to be consistent in the feedback they receive.
No alternative plans or options will be presented or talked about at the meeting Wednesday. Comment cards will be limited to feedback on Plan 1 at this time, with parents and CAC members being asked how well the plan fits within the priorities voted on by the Mills parents in September. District officials will be on hand to answer any questions you might have about Plan 1.
Want to take a look at Plan 1? Go to the Task Force Website and look under the November 18th agenda.
The CAC meeting is Wednesday, December 2 at 5:30 in the Mills cafeteria.
We'll see you there!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)