U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-06-2014, 01:45 PM
 
2,082 posts, read 3,566,752 times
Reputation: 2059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
...

Union county's real problem is that it and the towns are allowing any and all residential development without regard for future consequences. Until this problem is tackled, it really won't matter if another school is built. They are chasing a running horse.
Agree.
Some towns are smarter than others with respect to residential development. While Weddington and Marvin have the minimum requirement of 1 acre per residence, other towns seem to just be happy to squeeze in as many houses as possible.

In time I can see Weddington and Marvin school clusters as being sufficient (maybe some minor redistricting), but other areas like Waxhaw, etc, they'll definitely need a new school cluster and increased restriction on residential development (to slow down the running horse).

 
Old 02-06-2014, 02:23 PM
 
2,082 posts, read 3,566,752 times
Reputation: 2059
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc0789 View Post
...
The presentation was when it was presented to them. I'm sure that they could have assumed, but that is when it was presented to them....
How do you know?
And how realistic/responsible is to speak from a presentation that you see it first time and you also do not agree with it ...
 
Old 02-06-2014, 02:58 PM
 
36 posts, read 46,444 times
Reputation: 73
if everything in the presentation is complete and BOE can not back out from there, then there is a line also says; Redistricting costs nothing. Then why do people question that line item ?? If go by everything on presentation, then BOCC is welcome to contribute 3mil for the betterment of the school in UC which can be very well utilized to improve the standard of other schools. Because after all presentation says, redistricting costs nothing and our generous BOCC has contributed 3 million to the people of Union County. Because it will not only benefit students who are getting redistricted in those schools but also current students too.
First we are complaining about frequent redistricting, and when BOE comes up with plan to address that by moving more kids at once, people complain about why for few schools we are moving 5,000 students. Also, now with BOCC playing politics, people want to convert these schools into trailer park knowing it would be short term and other facility would not support these many kids. People want long term solution as long as it does not impact them.
 
Old 02-06-2014, 03:12 PM
 
631 posts, read 736,163 times
Reputation: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by cc0789 View Post
incorrect. The plan was developed by staff.

4 members of the BOE are the committee. Nobody else is ON that committee. 4 votes, 4 members.

Now staff is present as the meetings and sits at the table with the committee, just like staff is present at BOE meetings and sits at the table with the BOE (superintendent).

The presentation was when it was presented to them. I'm sure that they could have assumed, but that is when it was presented to them.
Thanks for the clarification CC.

Timeline:

Jan 6 - Facilities Committee Meeting - Staff presented redistrict NUMBERS to the Facilities Committee (public = )

Jan 14 - Facilities Committee Meeting - Staff presented redistrict BOUNDARIES to the Facilities Committee (public = )

Jan 23 - Full BOE Working Session - Staff presented alternatives to full BOE for discussion (public = )

Feb 4 - Regular BOE Board Meeting - Staff heard from public, deferred further discussion/votes (public = )

https://boe.ucps.k12.nc.us/meeting_docs.php

On the Jan 23rd meeting it was the staff that was presenting to the full BOE. The Facilities Committee had not met previous to that meeting, thus unable to review/approve the presentation. (Whether some did see it or not is unknown, but immaterial since they couldn't have voted to approve it)
 
Old 02-06-2014, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Pixley
3,521 posts, read 2,233,082 times
Reputation: 1858
Quote:
Originally Posted by TooLogical View Post
Incorrect.

The BOCC pandered to a small but loud segment of the public.

The BOE did NOT recommend trailers. Everyone needs to get this point. The staff presented alternatives but the BOE NEVER VOTED TO RECOMMEND ANYTHING.
I see what you are saying, nobody recommended anything yet. But the staff did create the MRC entry in the presentation as a viable option so it appears the staff researched this alternative and concluded that it would stave off redistricting and remove caps for 4 years .
 
Old 02-06-2014, 03:43 PM
 
386 posts, read 839,246 times
Reputation: 213
Has anyone heard when the BOE work session will be held? I keep hearing "probably next week" but wondering when they plan on announcing it so people who want to attend can rearrange their schedules.
 
Old 02-06-2014, 03:46 PM
 
149 posts, read 476,001 times
Reputation: 158
There was reference to the terms of the 3M being similar to the terms of the recent roof repair funds that the BOCC released.Does this mean the 3M would be deducted from the money awarded by the court? And was all that Money to be allocated to repairs?
 
Old 02-06-2014, 05:13 PM
 
4 posts, read 4,839 times
Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by raithfan View Post
My understanding is that all the overcrowding is projected, even with new construction, to be a five to seven year problem. Once the "growth bubble" passes thru the system there won't be any more problems. If they build we will potentially end up with empty or severely under utilized facilities.
Having come from an "over built" system you quickly get frustrated at the high property taxes and empty schools.
That's just my understanding from conversations with BOE and staff. Tell me if I'm off on this...
That would be accurate if there would be no more building of homes in Union county. How likely is that to happen? Building will not stop, and people with children moving into the Charlotte metro area WILL be moving into Union Co. to escape city taxes and the education system 'up there'. So, the concept of a 'bubble' is illusory. Also, what is the percentage of people that stay in Union Co. after their last child has graduated? Is it possible that they move out and sell their big house to other people with school aged chilren?
It is obvious that there is not a planning process or if there is one, it is not working. There should be quarterly updates on building permits and developer plans throughout the county. This data needs to be constantly evaluated and projected so that reliable student populations can be predicted one, two, five, and ten years down the line.
In my opinion, once you order a trailer onto your school property, you should be designing an addition to the school. Long term usage of trailers (since there will be no bubble) is not a solution, it's just a bandaid. Considering trailers as a solution is just kicking the can down the road and puts us into the situation we are in now.
Overcrowded classrooms hamper the education of all the students in a particular school. Something must be done, and unfortunately it seems redistricting is the best solution to the problem. But there would not be a problem had there been proper planning and forecasting of student populations to begin with. Looking at the numbers once overcrowding has already occurred is a failure on the part of the BOE and the county. Shame on them for not doing their jobs.
 
Old 02-06-2014, 05:20 PM
 
19 posts, read 26,128 times
Reputation: 27
Lets step back for a moment. The UCPS/BoE did not present a plan. They presented a series of options. If this was a plan it would have stated with what they wanted to achieve and how they were going to get there.

They identified one problem - overcrowding. Their option is to redistrict. That does not solve the problem. They should have a complete plan that takes it step by step on how to control all the variables which slows growth and prevents overcrowding.

Yes, there are outside variables that they don't control, but you know what, that's part of developing a plan. You identify them and determine how to make it work.

If they were smart they would have included the building repair issue as well. Because it goes hand in hand. You want kids to go to these schools? Make sure they're safe.

If that was the best UCPS/BoE could do then we're in worst shape than we thought.

The presentation by Dr Ellis and Dr Webb? Troublesome, at best. If that was done at a corporation they both would have been hung out to dry. But their educators not corporate career people. She misspoke. Lets move on. Hopefully she apologizes for misspeaking. The deck itself? If you don't want something to be considered, you don't put it on a chart. Simple as that. They would have been better off showing the options without any costs associated with it. You can argue that the board saw the deck for the first time that night. Maybe as a finished product but I'm sure that the board saw a draft of it. If you're presenting to a group that's on your side you want them to see it and get their input. If they aren't, you let them see it for the first time at the presentation.

John Collins made a statement at the meeting the other night about how many times he's been involved in redistricting over the years (I don't recall the exact number but it was sizable). He said we didn't understand. Well if he's been involved in so many then apparently he doesn't understand because one would think that after so many tries he would have been leading the charge to find a better way to address the issues.

Now for all of us. 216 pages and counting. Hardly any well thought out plans. A lot of finger pointing and back and forth about whose right and whose wrong. It could be that half you guys are the BoE and the other half is the BOCC . You want to contribute, come up with reasonable ideas for a plan to slow overcrowding, fix the schools, and get the test scores higher for all students.

If you don't have anything to contribute other than I'm right, you're wrong then maybe you need to find a hobby.
Flame me if you want but before you do take a deep breath and ask yourself if what I said is accurate.
Peace!

Last edited by Cowboys21; 02-06-2014 at 06:10 PM..
 
Old 02-06-2014, 06:21 PM
 
1,226 posts, read 2,049,500 times
Reputation: 1863
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteelCityinWaxhaw View Post
That would be accurate if there would be no more building of homes in Union county. How likely is that to happen? Building will not stop, and people with children moving into the Charlotte metro area WILL be moving into Union Co. to escape city taxes and the education system 'up there'. So, the concept of a 'bubble' is illusory. Also, what is the percentage of people that stay in Union Co. after their last child has graduated? Is it possible that they move out and sell their big house to other people with school aged chilren?
It is obvious that there is not a planning process or if there is one, it is not working. There should be quarterly updates on building permits and developer plans throughout the county. This data needs to be constantly evaluated and projected so that reliable student populations can be predicted one, two, five, and ten years down the line.
In my opinion, once you order a trailer onto your school property, you should be designing an addition to the school. Long term usage of trailers (since there will be no bubble) is not a solution, it's just a bandaid. Considering trailers as a solution is just kicking the can down the road and puts us into the situation we are in now.
Overcrowded classrooms hamper the education of all the students in a particular school. Something must be done, and unfortunately it seems redistricting is the best solution to the problem. But there would not be a problem had there been proper planning and forecasting of student populations to begin with. Looking at the numbers once overcrowding has already occurred is a failure on the part of the BOE and the county. Shame on them for not doing their jobs.
A PHD in demographics that has researched permits, statistics, census data, fertility rates, etc, etc, and has been very accurate disagrees with you, what are your credentials and your research?

There is no bubble?? Have you been paying attention? There is a big bubble of growth in the 6-8th grades. I do agree with you, however, that overcrowded classrooms hamper education, but I certainly would not agree that the BOE should spend my tax money on a school or addition that just is not sustainable in the long run. Again, there is no overcrowding in Union County as a whole. There are pockets of overcrowding at some schools, and plenty of available space at others.

Last edited by SunnyKayak; 02-08-2014 at 09:42 AM.. Reason: orphan: the quoted post you replied to was deleted
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.


Closed Thread



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:50 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top