Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Funny thing is a couple of months ago the McKibbon report is held at Walter bicket development center roughly a couple of hundred people. Next up Monroe development center probably over 1000 then onto Monroe HS and now Marvin Ridge HS. I hear the final vote might be held at the Bojangels Arena lol. Just a little humor but goes to show that in the beginning I don't think many people took it serious. Now.... Seems like everyone of us woke up to see the reality of this. Maybe next time there won't be a next time. Meaning let's plan ahead before it's to late. Just my opinion.
I think the difference between the interest in the first meeting and the second meeting is that going into this, most did not think that the redistricting was going to be so far reaching. Most expected it to be isolated to the neighborhoods whose schools were most crowded and not that there would be movement in almost all of the schools. I was following it from the beginning but being that I am not anywhere near the schools that are capped, I was shocked to see our neighborhood rezoned when the maps came out.
Statement posted on UCPS website regarding the "no additional cost to tax payers":
During the Board of Education Work Session presentation it was stated that redistricting would not have a monetary cost, what about the cost for the bus driving the students farther?
Funding for transportation is based upon the efficiency of the system. Each year the school system submits a map of school system attendance lines. The goal is to utilize full capacity while maintaining the fewest runs based upon the submitted map, with the fewest miles and driver hours possible. If the Board of Education were to enact new attendance lines prior to the beginning of a school year, bus routes would be recalibrated to ensure maximum capacity. After reviewing the proposed reassignment plan, the UCPS Transportation Department believes that the resulting new maps and bus routes will fall well within the range for efficient operations meaning the state will continue to fund our transportation services with no additional transportation cost to the school system.
Statement posted on UCPS website regarding the "no additional cost to tax payers":
During the Board of Education Work Session presentation it was stated that redistricting would not have a monetary cost, what about the cost for the bus driving the students farther?
Funding for transportation is based upon the efficiency of the system. Each year the school system submits a map of school system attendance lines. The goal is to utilize full capacity while maintaining the fewest runs based upon the submitted map, with the fewest miles and driver hours possible. If the Board of Education were to enact new attendance lines prior to the beginning of a school year, bus routes would be recalibrated to ensure maximum capacity. After reviewing the proposed reassignment plan, the UCPS Transportation Department believes that the resulting new maps and bus routes will fall well within the range for efficient operations meaning the state will continue to fund our transportation services with no additional transportation cost to the school system.
So they haven't done the work to forecast what the impact of the new routes would be. But they were able to forecast the cost for all the other options?
Statement posted on UCPS website regarding the "no additional cost to tax payers":
During the Board of Education Work Session presentation it was stated that redistricting would not have a monetary cost, what about the cost for the bus driving the students farther?
Funding for transportation is based upon the efficiency of the system. Each year the school system submits a map of school system attendance lines. The goal is to utilize full capacity while maintaining the fewest runs based upon the submitted map, with the fewest miles and driver hours possible. If the Board of Education were to enact new attendance lines prior to the beginning of a school year, bus routes would be recalibrated to ensure maximum capacity. After reviewing the proposed reassignment plan, the UCPS Transportation Department believes that the resulting new maps and bus routes will fall well within the range for efficient operations meaning the state will continue to fund our transportation services with no additional transportation cost to the school system.
They didn't answer the question. Blathering on about efficient operations does not address the simple question. Will it cost more? Notice that they also changed the wording from "no aditional cost to tax payers" to "No additional cost to the school system"... big difference.
Amazing how easy it is to catch their under handed double speak if you just pay attention. There are plenty of other examples as well.
I know ya'all are looking for the smoking gun and everything, but the funding comes from the state for the transportation - they already said that... This is the case as long as they meet "efficiency guidelines". So, yes - it may cost the state more to do this, however it won't cost the county or UCPS more.
So is anyone saying our state taxes will be going up as a direct result of this? If not, then I fail to see how UCPS isn't being forthcoming here.
I think people are reaching more and more instead of coming up with cold hard facts. Is anyone working on a real smoking gun or is the plan to over emphasize nitpicky little things that don't really amount to much?
They didn't answer the question. Blathering on about efficient operations does not address the simple question. Will it cost more? Notice that they also changed the wording from "no aditional cost to tax payers" to "No additional cost to the school system"... big difference.
Amazing how easy it is to catch their under handed double speak if you just pay attention. There are plenty of other examples as well.
Mikey. My concern is that the BoE took the time to research and explain how much it would cost each of the options, except redistricting. They should have done the research to forecast the additional cost, if there is any, and explain how it would or wouldn't impact county and/or state expenses. "believes" is not a valid answer.
"UCPS Transportation Department believes that the resulting new maps and bus routes will fall well within the range for efficient operations...."
I know ya'all are looking for the smoking gun and everything, but the funding comes from the state for the transportation - they already said that... This is the case as long as they meet "efficiency guidelines". So, yes - it may cost the state more to do this, however it won't cost the county or UCPS more.
So is anyone saying our state taxes will be going up as a direct result of this? If not, then I fail to see how UCPS isn't being forthcoming here.
I think people are reaching more and more instead of coming up with cold hard facts. Is anyone working on a real smoking gun or is the plan to over emphasize nitpicky little things that don't really amount to much?
Just curious….for the people that seem to favor Redistricting….simple question…..why?
The people that oppose it (me included) have been very vocal and have brought viable options to the table (i.e.: Multitrack, Mobile Classrooms, etc). I am curious to hear from the proponents of Redistricting, why do you seem to tout this as the best option. My issue with it is over the past 10-15 yrs, it has been done numerous times in the past, all with seems the same result….Redistricting is supposed to be a "long term" solution, yet due to the amount of times it has been done, it has proven to be short term. My opinion only, but there are better short term solutions that are less disruptive to children than Redistricting. Even the proponents of redistricting, most of them, seem to agree that a new cluster or clusters will have to be erected in the near future. so if we are going to go forward with new structures, why would we even entertain the thought of redistricting, when we know we will only have to do it again
Last edited by First and Ten; 01-30-2014 at 08:49 AM..
Mikey. My concern is that the BoE took the time to research and explain how much it would cost each of the options, except redistricting. They should have done the research to forecast the additional cost, if there is any, and explain how it would or wouldn't impact county and/or state expenses. "believes" is not a valid answer.
"UCPS Transportation Department believes that the resulting new maps and bus routes will fall well within the range for efficient operations...."
I don't disagree with the analysis part, but I think it's safe to say in the case of transportation it won't cost them more... You're right, though - they should be called out on this. But it's not the smoking gun I am hoping for... In fact, I keep hoping that someone will come up with one!
Seriously, though - I hope everyone keeps their cool Tuesday. If it gets out of hand, you may give them a reason to cancel the "cluster meetings" or other working sessions. Which would basically leave 1 more meeting until they vote. Be respectful, please.
I concur. Like I said before, yelling or crying or making noise while a board member is speaking...these things might make you feel good in the moment, but they're not making you any closer to defeating redistricting. If anything, you're making pro-redistricting board members dig in their heels more to vote against these people that can't keep their heads on straight. So ask yourself this question before you go to the next meeting: Do I believe there is any chance that redistricting can still fail? If the answer is yes, then be more civil in that meeting than you've ever been in your life. If the answer is no, hey then go heckle your heart out in protest before the police escort you out. You'll look ridiculous and you'll achieve nothing, but sometimes these things can feel cathartic I guess.
Just curious….for the people that seem to favor Redistricting….simple question…..why?
The people that oppose it (me included) have been very vocal and have brought viable options to the table (i.e.: Multitrack, Mobile Classrooms, etc). I am curious to hear from the proponents of Redistricting, why do you seem to tout this as the best option. My issue with it is over the past 10-15 yrs, it has been done numerous times in the past, all with seems the same result….Redistricting is supposed to be a "long term" solution, yet due to the amount of times it has been done, it has proven to be short term. My opinion only, but there are better short term solutions that are less disruptive to children than Redistricting. Even the proponents of redistricting, most of them. Seem to agree that a new cluster or clusters will have to be erected in the near future. so if we are going to go forward with new structures, why would we even entertain the thought of redistricting, when we know we will only have to do it again
I don't think it's fair to say that I "favor" redistricting... I can see why you may think that based on my more recent posting history - but I was a very strong advocate for transparency in the process and when they went into "facilities meetings" I was blasting the BOE about how horrible this so called "process" is... something that I still believe today. There's not enough transparency into HOW they drew these lines - or the process in general.
However, I am enough of a realist to see that this is small time politics and it all basically comes down to a simple majority vote of 9 elected BOE members. What I think doesn't matter - what they think is what it comes down to... So most recently I have been trying to put myself into their shoes - pretending, if you will, that I am on the BOE. Looking at the information they are reviewing to make their decision. These people have their own lives just like we do... They all are predisposed to certain perceptions about the county - influenced by where they live... So they all have their own little take on the big picture, but have to rely on Ellis and Webb to advise them when it comes to the numbers... and I don't have to tell you how ugly those numbers are - especially in Cuthbertson.
They need new schools - everyone on all sides of this argument agrees with that. But if they can't get funding for new schools until they prove to be using all the seats in the county, how do you avoid that one obvious point? It's the elephant in the room. Disprove THAT - show everyone they CAN get funding with 30 trailers in Cuthbertson and I bet you get a new wave of support.
Instead, too much time and emphasis is being wasted on home values and scores... We all signed those contracts knowing the only thing we were promised was an education from UCPS. Nowhere are we told we are assigned a specific cluster. There's a proven history of redistricting. People were talking about it for years after the last one... Ignorance of this fact when moving here does not hold weight. The attendance maps were printed and with me when I was home shopping. I looked at the enrollment numbers of the schools I was thinking of assigning to. I looked at the next logic cluster should I get pushed further out. This is all public info... We see the rate of the development around us.
Lastly, I sympathize with those who have been redistricted several times and have been long time UC residents. But, at some level you have to think they would know best of all the power these 9 people have.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
