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.
I'm not sure if it's possible, but is there a way to look at the tracking pattern for the map they voted to take to the public comment meeting in Jan. to see tracking percentages into middle school. Specifically, I'm wondering about the Mills/Gorzycki split as a result of this proposed plan.
ReplyDeleteLast year's FUBTF gave Mills a 47%/53% split. It seems like this new elem plan moves about half of the neighborhoods that were in the Small section to Boone. And, that would result in Mills being about 25%/75% split between Small/Gorzycki. And then Boone would end up with about 22% going to Small as well?
Am I estimating that right? If so, this plan would isolate a small percentage of kids at both Mills and Boone to be separated from their peers after Elem going into MS. Moving Mills kids to Clayton or Kiker wouldn't have isolated any kids from their peers going into MS. Ugh! Nothing like being an outcast going into the middle school years.
God bless you & Lisa, Michelle. I hope you've got some Ambien you can tap into tonight to get a little well-deserved rest -- maybe even boundary-nightmare-free. :\
ReplyDeleteThank you, Lisa & Michelle. Obviously you worked hard and creatively to find alternative solutions. Whenever you get a chance: This plan would move Circle C North, Vintage Place, and Park Place to Kiker? And also the Villages east of Beckett to Boone?
ReplyDeleteHank,
ReplyDeleteI believe the approved option of the three proposals offered by Michelle and Lisa moved Circle C North and Vintage Place to Kiker, and kept Park Place at Mills. Then the proposal that was later offered by the Boone representatives (and approved) moved the Villages east of Beckett to Boone.
Attending this meeting put me at a loss and gave me a first hand view of how gerrymandering occurs. Somehow tracking and stability became the "golden calf". Where tracking had been a primary concern at the beginning of the process, it is now a dirty word. As a resident of one area now slated for Boone, my children will be going to school where the majority of children will track to both a different middle school and high school.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest disappointment was the majority of the boundary task force did not really look at tracking or other implications. The proposal felt like a hail Mary pass from Boone that ended up being approved because the numbers on a spreadsheet looked good. Very frustrating, very unimpressive.
Theresa Aradi
Eric is correct - I apologize for not being specific with the plan when I wrote this at midnight last night. I will add the sections to the posting.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all posters that last night was extremely frustrating. The "process" that was followed didn't allow the group to be successful. If you recall in earlier meetings, the group was never successful when suggestions were made in a vacuum. It took Matt making an overall suggestion that really moved the group in the right direction and then finally deciding on Plan 1. Last night the group faced the same issue. Highlighting small changes in isolation either got a thumbs up or thumbs down. Despite multiple attempts again to throw out a comprehensive solution, it was repeatedly shot down in the name of "process". I'm disappointed that this is the best effort from the group because I don't believe they were allowed to put together a plan that fit the requirements of each school. As Michelle stated, they were continually told they would come back around to it. Then at the end when everyone was tired and ready to be done with it the majority voted and this hodge-podge plan is the one going to the public. My fear now is that even though there is a better plan out there, the Mills and Clayton reps will not ever have the chance to present it.
ReplyDeleteNow I'll sit and stew over this during the holidays. I'll think about my daughter who will go to Boone and then shift to Small with about 10 of her peers. Maybe life is easy on a middle school girl that knows 10-15 people in her new school. Talking to my wife, who taught middle school, it doesn't sound like it is. I'll think about ripping the security blanket that is Mills from my son who will enter kindergarten next year. He's only been going to Mills since he was walking. Maybe I'm making too big a deal of the comfort that he has walking into a school with confidence on his first day, knowing his way around, knowing familiar faces, teachers and administration. Maybe that's not what I should want for my kids.
Then again, that's exactly what I should want for my kids. That's what makes this frustrating. Unfortunately I had to witness the process as it unfolded to send them to Boone.
I am in utter shock.
ReplyDeleteWe've seen a couple of plans come through that have then been changed. Can we anticipate additional changes to this plan, or does "going public with the plan" in early January indicate that it is virtually a done deal? It seems like the process for getting to Plan 1 took much longer, and this feels like a quick decision considering the new demographic numbers basically meant starting from scratch. Since the map is going to the communnity, will the community's input be heard or is it being presented as THE plan?
ReplyDeleteThanks.
Karen Scott
Mills is way too small with these new numbers. The proposal to send neighbohoods to Boone is a complete and utter violation of tracking as well as complete community upheaval. As has been stated above, this proposal isolates and punishes our children who will go to middle school with only 10 of their classmates. And, this will segregate our children in every other activity our kids are involved in...all of the Scouts and sports programs use Mopac as the dividing line. So our kids will be divided between their school and extra-curricular lives. It's like they will be 6-year old commuter students...bussed off to a completely different neighborhood to go to school, but the rest of their activities will take place west of Mopac. The task force meetings as well are at best chaotic with last night's meeting in particular now in the running to receive an oscar, what with all the drama and race-cards being played.
ReplyDeleteStaci Fair
Community input was the first impetus (followed by the volatility in the data), that started the chain reaction of last nights changes. So more community input, at the Jan 5 meeting and until then on this blog and by letters, will be successful in convincing the task force that our concerns need to be discussed openly and fully, with no part of it being shut down early.
ReplyDeleteAnother note, the last minute Boone proposal was voted on even though 3 reps had left at the scheduled time for the meeting adjournment. Machiavelli says that the winner getting their way justifies any manuever. I say that the chaos described above, and the unfairness of voting on a major and contentious move with 3 members out of the room, compromises the integrity of this outcome.
It's too bad the task force didn't agree to address the underutilization issues at a later date. It seems to me that some sort of consolidation of the schools in the area directly east of MOPAC makes more sense. They are just prolonging the inevitable shut-down of one or more of those campuses. Too bad for our children.
ReplyDeleteJust to point out: Two areas got shifted east and broke tracking, Patton's Monterrey Oaks area, and Mills Villages of Western Oaks. Patton's area is made up entirely of apartments that have the ability to move easily if they want to. The Mills neighborhood is made up of 1600 homes of the Villages of Western Oaks that has been at Mills since it opened. This neighborhood clearly is the loser in the new map, by breaking elementary to middle school tracking, and isolation from the their community of 1600 homes. This horrible move puts about 15 kids per grade from Mills at Boone. The 15 5th graders will move to Small and not know anyone from Mills, Oak Hill or Patton that feed into Small, while the entire class of Boone's 5th graders move to Covington. A disgrace!! Also, Small has three feeders schools currently: Mills, Oak Hill, and Patton. Now, under this plan, it will have five feeder schools: Mills, Oak Hill, Patton, Sunset Valley (20 kids), and Boone (15 kids). It's not fair to Small, and it's not fair to these 35 kids that are being using as pawns because the Board of Trustees don't want to look at their numerous underutilized schools east of Mopac. Sunset Valley, Boone, and Cowan should not have been put into this process!!
ReplyDeleteCowan seems to have preferred to be left out of the process. Indeed, they managed to pass an undoing of Plan 1 for their neighborhood, bringing them back to the present day boundary.
ReplyDeleteWhen asked why they proposed this 'adjustment', they stated that the residents in question, predominantly in apartments evidently, predicted that they might move South back into Cowan territory.
As I saw it, this was not a rousing endorsement from Cowan of the present philosophy of using other kids to 'fix' broken schools.
It is only the two schools that, by their own observation, are not desirable to many people in SW Austin, that wanted to be in this process as a way of perpetrating a utopian vision, one that is shared by a few of the core members that advocate for a 'fair' allocation of kids to each school (not unlike discussions of water rights, or tax dollar allocations, or other resource based debates).
Hmmmm.....
I couldn't agree more. Lisa. I think AISD is wanting us to do their dirty work for them. The AISD funding survey stated that 3.5 million dollars would be saved if 5 elementary schools were consoliated. Since AISD is 15 million in the hole, that seems like a better solution for all...Boone (as this move will complicate its future and possibly leave it out of increasing it's numbers in the future), certainly the poor isolated Mills and Patton children, and the tax-payers' money as well.
ReplyDeleteAnother point:
ReplyDeleteUnder Plan 1 that went to our parents and CAC Mills moves 92 students. Under last nights plan Mills moves 309 students!!! This is totally unbalanced, and too drastic of a change from Plan 1. Our community was just coming to terms with really having to leave Mills, and this new plan is a total slap in the face to our families, staff, and community. We don't want 309 students moved, which puts us smaller than Kiker, Cowan and Patton. We will be undercapacity!! We need to go back and start over with this plan and make the necessary changes to fix this mess. I will never accept moving 309 Mills students.
Is there anything we, as parents, can do to help you, the posters of this blog? In no uncertain terms, does showing up to meetings help? Does writing letters help? We know you have all of Mills at best interest and and working very hard, but I wonder if there is more we as a community can do to help encourage a new vote - plan - demographic map etc? Please ask and I'm sure some of us will rally the troops to make an effort! Keep up the good work. Your tireless efforts are much appreciated.
ReplyDeleteThere has always been pressure on Mills as a resource to other schools to fix their problems, which is why Boone and Sunset valley have used this opportunity for months now to propose these sorts of map moves. In November when they proposed the same move, this blog went bananas.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, all of that discussion was legitimate and predicated on points of argument that were first raised by Boone at the FUBTF.
In any case, reps and parents from all the schools, and probably the AISD staff also, read this blog and received the message of our discontent loud and clear, and that influenced the earlier outcome of honoring some of our wished, or at least discussing them seriously. Obviously that fact makes us seem like snobs and belligerents, but if that is what it requires to be taken seriously, so be it. We are entitled to our opinions.
My conclusion is that articulating all of your points on this site, as well as in emails to all involved, works powerfully in allowing Michelle and Lisa to have their say in the meeting without being told to stay quiet or stick to the party lines. It doesn't guarantee an outcome that we like, but it forces the process to be more fair.
Here are a few things you can do:
ReplyDelete- revive the online and paper petitions and get as many signatures as possible supporting consistent tracking for Mills students. Numbers matter.
- have as many people sign up to speak as possible at the Jan 5 meeting - turnout is critical for this meeting. You want to get as many people speaking on the issue of tracking.
- email the board and staff questioning their process - ie, making decision in a vacuum, allowing a majority only vote, not adhering to the criteria, whether the task force should be addressing Boone and SV - whatever issues you have about the process. I would focus my comments on process at this point.
That's my two cents, whatever it's worth.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI found the planning map, so please disregard my last post: http://www.austin.isd.tenet.edu/inside/2004bond/boundaries/docs/bond2004_SWES_Existing_Boundaries_20091014.pdf. This was October's map, so I'm not sure it it's been updated further, but it appears to be the latest one.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWere transfer students currently attending Mills included in the current population numbers?
ReplyDeleteNo, transfers have always been discussed vehemently, but always ignored in the planning numbers. In fact, the numbers published are the population, i.e. the number of kids that exist (now or in the future) within a polygon on the map. Actual 'membership' at school varies according to individual behavior.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of which, many of my neighbors have predicted that their own individual behavior might significantly alter next years actual membership numbers.
I guess the school cafeteria knows not to order all the chicken nuggets until they count how many kids actually show up. Home school publishers, on the other hand, may want to fire up the printing presses.
It is my understanding transfer students are never counted in these numbers. Any idea on how hard it would be to become a transfer if we were shifted out?
ReplyDeleteAll this acrimony could've been avoided if our Orwellian AISD, and their FUBTF acolytes, instead chose to soft sell the Mills community. Had they called a meeting and explained what their vision was for integrated us into a different school, and answering all, I mean all, of our concerns about said school, I would've listened with much respect and consideration. As it is now, I feel like the proverbial low hanging fruit that has been rudely picked and eaten.
ReplyDeleteThere are some schools that will gladly approve your application to transfer. Mills is currently not one of them unless you fit into one of the narrowly defined criteria. SWES will probably accept some, based solely on being under 100%.
ReplyDeleteNow that I think about it, Mills is going to be below 100% too! Yippee. I think I'll go fill out a transfer form.
Otherwise, I suppose we'll be shopping around to every school within 20 miles and comparing their performance and programs and suitability. This is what I do in the free marketplace when I buy a car. Is not my son more important? I will define what I would like to see in a school, and will attempt to evaluate all the options fairly, then I'll decide which school to which he should transfer. No-one will tell me what my opinion 'ought' to be about a school.
Is there an option for legal action against AISD because so many people believe the proccess that was promised was broken? There is obvious frustration with AISD about breaking promises to the communities it is supposed to represent. If so many people believe they were not represented correctly could legal action be taken?
ReplyDeleteDumb question - but with 96F2 (which encompasses both CCNorth and VOWO) moving to Kiker, is it the intention that all of CCNorth moves or just the portion West of Barstow? I'm not wild about moving anywhere, but Kiker is a good school and we'll adjust. However the move of Mills students to Boone is unconscionable and must not stand. Do you have any sense of whether this map can change or are we stuck with this mess?
ReplyDeleteThank you Lisa & Michelle for all of your work. I cannot begin to imagine the level of frustration you both must be feeling. Thank you for continuing to work on this mess.
Rachel Drga
To clarify a bit - my objection to the move of Mills students to Boone is due to the huge disruption to the tracking for these students. Altering the tracking pattern to this degree is not acceptable.
ReplyDeleteRachel Drga
I can't imagine what those who voted for this were thinking to set up these few children to go to an Elementary School where all their friends will track to a different Middle School. It's not necessary. Mills doesn't need the additional relief with CCN and VP going to Kiker. What happens when these little kids get to Small and don't know a soul. It's heartbreaking and so cruel.
ReplyDelete@ Rachel - We received a new map (yet again) on Tuesday night that split Circle C North - from VOWO. That section, that includes both areas east and west of Barstow is now called 96F2. VOWO is now 96F3. 96F2 is projected to have 108 students for 2010-2011 and 102 students for 2014=2015. So, under this plan, the Kiker/Mills dividing line would be right before the stop sign on Hillside Terrace (where that Cirlce C marker is).
ReplyDeleteThe idea was that we would try to move kids south to Kiker - which they agreed to. We were thinking that would give us enough relief that we would not have to lose kids out of tracking.
Unfortunately, the only numbers the district staff would allow us to look at was the 5 year numbers which showed Mills at 112% capacity after the Kiker move. These are the least reliable numbers, as they rely heavily on past trends to project future ones.
--------------------
I spoke with Mrs. Butler yesterday and she is very upset. Keep watching the blog for updates, as there may be a meeting of Mills parents prior to the Jan. 5 boundary meeting.
-------------------
If you are sending letters to the board/superintendent, can you please copy Lisa or I so we can see what you're sending, please? We'd like to make sure we're all making similar points.
Michelle, is AISD supposed to post the new map anytime soon? I would like to look at it before writing anything. Thanks again. - Hank Card
ReplyDeleteI am a resident of the only apartment complex that is currently within Mills boundaries but is slated to be moved to Boone next year. There are numerous Mills kids living here, and I am certain, they, like myself, chose Legacy because of Mills. I have spoken with the Legacy office, and they have suggested posting letters at our two postal centers alerting parents of the impending boundary change.
ReplyDelete@Hank - no map, but you can keep checking the AISD website for updates. If I receive something/see something, I'll try to post it here.
ReplyDeleteMy frustration mirrors earlier posts. We need to get very active at this point. In addition to sending emails, I would like to send written letters. Does anyone have physical addresses for the task force members?
ReplyDeleteScott Campbell
I attended the meeting Tuesday night and was disappointed for 5 reasons.
ReplyDelete1. Clayton, Kiker, Mills (and SWES) had plans that helped solve Mills overcrowding and were satisfactory to those communities, but the committee voted AGAINST those plans.
2. Boone presented a plan that our representatives (Michelle and Lisa) adamantly opposed, but the committee voted FOR it.
3. If ASID simply wanted new boundary lines to equalize school populations, they could have had a staffer do that. The purpose of the FUBTF was to find a plan that listened to the affected communities.
4. The plan that was approved got approved at the end of over 3 hours and I feel people just wanted to go home. Members of the FUBTF even said they were tired of hearing about things like tracking. It's unfortunate that voting was made in this kind of atmosphere.
5. If this plan is approved, my family will likely move to stay in the Mills zone. I really don't want to move.
Thank you Michelle and Lisa for doing your best!
Not only was everyone exhausted, but 2 (or was it 3) members had already left due to the late hour. So the most contentious proposal of all, that had been voted down in November and was known to be both still desired by Boone and despised by Mills, with members missing.
ReplyDeleteHardly a collegial process! More like the tug-o-war that it really is, at least in the minds of the more utopian sorts on the task force. Oh well, its just kids.
AISD has now put the wrong map (the old one) up on its website. Perhaps they'll fix it soon.
ReplyDeleteI just checked, and the new map (they are calling it Plan 2) is now up on the AISD website.
ReplyDeleteWhen you contact the FUBTF and AISD Board I would strongly suggest that you not include any disparaging comparisons between Mills and Boone, nor any information indicating that property values are of primary concern. Emphasize the points made by Lisa and Michelle - tracking, additional ES splits leading to more feeder schools into Small, etc.
ReplyDeleteTraci Anderson
Can I ask Lisa or Michelle to give a recap of what we should be doing right now? I have already sent emails, what else can we do at this point? And what is the format of the next meeting? Will common people affected by this change ever be allowed to speak?
ReplyDeleteI want to second what Traci said. Emphasize tracking, and DO NOT talk about how property values will be affected. This task force is charged to make decisions concerning schools and kids, and your property values do not enter into it.
ReplyDeleteThis is a terrible turn of events and needs to be loudly protested by an engaged group of parents. Let the Board know how unhappy you are with the process, and how unhappy you will continue to be when election time rolls around. They listen to people who are active and who vote.
I feel like they need to address once and for all the way they are going to address redrawing boundaries. If they are going to have neighborhood representatives, then they need to allow them a meaningful voice. For the second year in a row, they are letting the process get away from them, and result in a plan that's really bad for kids.
Michelle and Lisa, you two deserve lots of treats from Santa for all the "stuff" you've had to deal with and all the hard work you've put in.
Just a reminder that there is still a petition out there to sign: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/millstracking. PLEASE ask everyone you know to sign it.
ReplyDeleteTheresa ARadi