New HS in South Austin (Crockett, Bowie: 2015, to buy, school district)

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Raskolnikov

You know what's one way to totally destroy a neighborhood? Jack with school zoning and make the people who bought a house in that neighborhood because of the school drive past that school to go to a different school.

Imo i wonder if a law has ever been introduced at the state level to prevent cities from bait and switching neighborhood schools. (Buy a house in this neighborhood because the schools are so good.. Prices go up and up and up... Taxes go up... Then change school zoning to underperforming schools. Everyone moves away and the neighborhood becomes a slum. Rinse and repeat.)

^^^ this is why option #2 in my original post would never work - parents wouldn't allow it. I think this is why nothing will ever be done to relieve overcrowding. Taxpayers won't approve funding to construct a new school, and parents won't allow boundaries to be redrawn. I think we will continue to get what we get, and parents will just have to grit their teeth and bear the overcrowding for the next 15 years.

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Raskolnikov

Well the particular part of 78749 that my community is in, already is 8 minutes to the west - and slightly north- of Bowie. I can tell you that it makes no sense to drive all the way to Crockett. (Except in the minds of radical ideologues or people who have no skin in the game aka kids and homes in these communities)

So you are on the very far SW edge of your zip code, and the argument can be made that your specific neighborhood would be closer to the HS you want.

my quote from earlier - I gave general zips to avoid splitting hairs.

Originally Posted by sojourner77

IMO - To speak in general areas and what they should attend:


78749/78745/78744 should be zoned to Crockett HS.

[Trainwreck20]

The boundaries down south for the high schools have been redrawn at least a couple times, and there are always squawks from residents, but it can happen. The existing boundaries, though, have already been stretched pretty far to try and lower the load on Bowie, and distance is still a significant consideration.

As far as 'bait and switch' on school zoning - point out where an area has become a slum in recent memory due to school zoning changes. There may be small areas that are negatively impacted from time to time, but not near enough tax revenue worth the school going to battle over with parents, not even close. The school pretty much does zoning strictly to balance the load on the schools. If anything, such 'bait and switch' scenarios would raise the quality of the schools as opposed to decimating a neighborhood.

And finally, if you want a state law about zoning schools, that will probably come AFTER all school money from state property taxes is thrown in a big bucket and redistributed by student count, not affluence .

[Raskolnikov]

Originally Posted by sojourner77

^^^ this is why option #2 in my original post would never work - parents wouldn't allow it. I think this is why nothing will ever be done to relieve overcrowding. Taxpayers won't approve funding to construct a new school, and parents won't allow boundaries to be redrawn. I think we will continue to get what we get, and parents will just have to grit their teeth and bear the overcrowding for the next 15 years.

Not true. Looking at Austin in particular, the taxpayers here seem to have no problem with approving bonds and raising taxes for things like schools. Compared to Dallas or Houston - we approve things all the time. If something doesn't pass in Austin, you can bet that the project is just ridiculous. For instance, I voted for the funding of the new schools. But, central Austinites I feel voted primarily against the design and construction of a new south school because they like to shut down anything that makes life better for people who live outside of the aesthetically approved-of areas. The snobbery and elitism in Austin from central Austin-ites about the "burbs" drives a lot of what happens. Talk about spending taxpayer money according to 'affluence'. Look no further than Austin to see how taxpayer money goes towards things valued only by a core elite. Don't believe me? Ask legacy east Austin residents. Now that the white 'aesthetically correct' liberals have moved in, roads finally get fixed, bike lanes, parks, city services - all to make the city resemble what white people like.

[centralaustinite]

I have actually tried to argue the school angle when protesting my taxes, TCAD uses comps for my house (zoned to Travis) that were built the same year and in the same style but are zoned for Austin HS. No dice!

[sojourner77]

Originally Posted by Raskolnikov

Not true. Looking at Austin in particular, the taxpayers here seem to have no problem with approving bonds and raising taxes for things like schools. Compared to Dallas or Houston - we approve things all the time. If something doesn't pass in Austin, you can bet that the project is just ridiculous.

The voters already rejected bonds to build the new south HS. It could be years before it ever comes to ballot again, and by then it will be widespread public knowledge that the AISD student population is dropping and building a new HS will be even more politically unpopular than it is now.

I think what's going to happen is that AISD will not purchase the land from the 2008 bond election. These funds will later be rolled into a ballot that will propose reallocating the funds to something like creating a magnet. Political gridlock between Central and SW Austin will prevent this from passing, and AISD will never exercise the right to issue the 32mil in bonds.

[Raskolnikov]

Or, the 32 million voted onl for a suburban school will be used for bike lanes, or more than likely, to give a huge real estate project or corporation a tax incentive to locate here. To add insult to injury, now the city has effectively been successful at raising taxes for one purpose (a new school), but then never built the school but used our tax money on something we did not vote on.

Also, to put more clarity on it -- the people behind this bait and switch are white liberal/ progressives, who see no hypocrisy in themselves.

City of Austin as usual.

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Raskolnikov

To add insult to injury, now the city has effectively been successful at raising taxes for one purpose (a new school)

Taxes don't get raised until bonds get issued. Which these never have.

[Raskolnikov]

That's good to know.

[centralaustinite]

Originally Posted by Raskolnikov

Or, the 32 million voted onl for a suburban school will be used for bike lanes, or more than likely, to give a huge real estate project or corporation a tax incentive to locate here. To add insult to injury, now the city has effectively been successful at raising taxes for one purpose (a new school), but then never built the school but used our tax money on something we did not vote on.

Also, to put more clarity on it -- the people behind this bait and switch are white liberal/ progressives, who see no hypocrisy in themselves.

City of Austin as usual.

You are quite confused. The bond issue was for AISD to issue bonds to purchase the land for a school. The bonds have never been issued, the taxes have not been raised, the money has not been created!! And the land has not been purchased.

AND AISD and the City of Austin are very separate entities with separate authority to issue bonds and collect taxes. Money in one place (AISD) cannot be used by the City of Austin!