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 06-30-2017, 08:12 AM
 
Location: Union County
5,787 posts, read 8,436,546 times
Reputation: 4818

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by UCTransplant View Post
I assume you are saying that tongue in cheek....3 months after the last redistricting, New Town Elementary was capped. A redistricting when implemented is supposed to alleviate over crowding for the long term. How do you justify implementing the most drastic form of shifting population and cap a school 3 months later? ....Porter Ridge was basically busting at the seams and after redistricting, no noticeable change. The old regime used the McKibbin report as their bible for redistricting. When later asked, Mr McKibbin essentially said his report should have never been used as a guideline for redistricting. This type of conflicting info plays into the hands of the conspiracy theorists. The report basically said that in 5 yrs, the school population would DECREASE. So if not the alleviate population concerns, which this redistricting clearly failed to address, why was it done? Help school scores? Help developers? Clearly population wasn't the concern
This is a fair assessment and many of the things you highlight have conveniently been forgotten over time. BTW - Not only was NTES capped, Lawson homes North of Cuthbertson Rd are still currently redistricted to the Parkwood cluster for Elem. That band-aid flying directly in the face of "neighborhood schools" is a perfect example of how the last redistricting did not work as intended... Many, many schools are "over capacity" and many are woefully under-utilized.

There are people who are still looking for the answer to your last set of questions. If you watch back the first committee meeting you can see committee members asking "why" when it came to the last redistricting - just like you're looking to try to understand. Unfortunately, the BOE and UCPS Admin have essentially completely turned over in the 3 years since that infamous vote. Karma? Destiny? You decide.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-30-2017, 09:02 AM
 
2,202 posts, read 2,384,156 times
Reputation: 3151
Not a fair assessment at all. NTES was NEVER capped after reassignment. The only move the BOE made was to assign all the new housing yet to be built in Lawson Phase 4 to Waxhaw. Not a single student was moved, only those homes yet to be built were assigned to WES. No schools have been capped since reassignment.

NTES reached cap-able limit but it was only for a few months prior to the new school year, then the population had hit it's peak and started down slightly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2017, 09:42 AM
 
Location: Union County
5,787 posts, read 8,436,546 times
Reputation: 4818
Quote:
Originally Posted by getatag View Post
Not a fair assessment at all. NTES was NEVER capped after reassignment. The only move the BOE made was to assign all the new housing yet to be built in Lawson Phase 4 to Waxhaw. Not a single student was moved, only those homes yet to be built were assigned to WES. No schools have been capped since reassignment.

NTES reached cap-able limit but it was only for a few months prior to the new school year, then the population had hit it's peak and started down slightly.
I apologize, you are correct. NTES was never technically capped after the last proposal. However, the redistricting forecast called for 843 students at NTES in 2014-15 - it actually ended up being 1,009. That is way over capacity and by all reasonable expectations should have been capped. Instead, the new Lawson phase was redistricted to Parkwood while the expected grandfathered students left. KES on the other hand was forecast for 824 students in 2014-15 - it actually was 692.

This was a huge miss on the plan at near ground zero for capacity issues. Having to operate at over one thousand elementary students in 1 school is disconcerting to say the least and not what one would call successful. Especially when it only fell to 960 the next year and continues to be over 900 today. "Watch level" (a term coined during the last redistricting discussions) was set at 800. No matter what we term it, that is too many students in a school mere months after redistricting 5k+ kids. Trailer city for a BOE that was so anti-trailers using that mantra to justify the redistricting in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2017, 10:50 AM
 
2,202 posts, read 2,384,156 times
Reputation: 3151
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyKid View Post
I apologize, you are correct. NTES was never technically capped after the last proposal. However, the redistricting forecast called for 843 students at NTES in 2014-15 - it actually ended up being 1,009. That is way over capacity and by all reasonable expectations should have been capped. Instead, the new Lawson phase was redistricted to Parkwood while the expected grandfathered students left. KES on the other hand was forecast for 824 students in 2014-15 - it actually was 692.

This was a huge miss on the plan at near ground zero for capacity issues. Having to operate at over one thousand elementary students in 1 school is disconcerting to say the least and not what one would call successful. Especially when it only fell to 960 the next year and continues to be over 900 today. "Watch level" (a term coined during the last redistricting discussions) was set at 800. No matter what we term it, that is too many students in a school mere months after redistricting 5k+ kids. Trailer city for a BOE that was so anti-trailers using that mantra to justify the redistricting in the first place.
The mantra wasn't not using the trailers, it was the safety issues involved with trailers. Would have been great if they'd done away with all of them. It was financial unobtainable based on the way Commissioners were funding. (although they were willing to put 3 mil out there for trailers..... of course, truth be know it wasn't so much they wanted people to be happy at their current school, they wanted to provide as much embarrassment as possible for the BOE. They used it to deflect scrutiny on the General Fund surpluses for 20 years that amassed over 238 million in discretionary funding and questionable judgement regarding not instituting bond tax increases that were voted on years ago.)
UCPS has always had trailers and for the foreseeable future will continue to have trailers. The mantra coming from the BOE at the time was "trailers are a liability, therefore need to be minimized as best as possible".

1009 was the top of the enrollment. As people (CAPS) like to point out when they wanted to remain at NTES, CMS schools, specifically HawkRidge ES, was well over that by 100's of students and still functioned fine. Can't have it both ways. There are way less trailers in use today in UCPS than in 2005-2013.

My opinion, which counts for nothing, says anything over 450 students in an elementary causes the vibe of the school to change and presents the possibility that education may suffer. Nothing I can point to in cold hard facts, but gut feeling. (I should know, I probably spent more time in K-6 than most of you...lol)
In Union County, nothing can be done about keeping elementary school attendance low. If that was done we'd have a school on every corner. Just look now at current schools. Shiloh and Sun Valley ES on the same property with Sardis three miles away. Rea View and Marvin with 2 miles of each other. Antioch, Indian Trail, and Weddington in a 6 or 7 mile triangle. Commissioners refused to approve the purchase of the Cuthbertson property years ago without the BOE consenting to a plan for 4 schools on that property. Whose in charge of population density planning in high growth areas of the county?
While I'm asking questions regarding who did things and why, who scuttled the YMCA on acreage at Cuthbertson? That would have been a win,win,win situation for the Y, for the schools, and for that area of the county.

Ask parents if they want to move their kids. The vast majority will say no regardless of how crowded the school gets. Ask again after a few years in the new school and the vast majority will say no again.
Same answers whether redistricting for newly constructed schools or re-aligning older attendance areas.

*sheepishly steps off soapbox now*
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2017, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Union County
5,787 posts, read 8,436,546 times
Reputation: 4818
Quote:
Originally Posted by getatag View Post
The mantra wasn't not using the trailers, it was the safety issues involved with trailers. Would have been great if they'd done away with all of them. It was financial unobtainable based on the way Commissioners were funding. (although they were willing to put 3 mil out there for trailers..... of course, truth be know it wasn't so much they wanted people to be happy at their current school, they wanted to provide as much embarrassment as possible for the BOE. They used it to deflect scrutiny on the General Fund surpluses for 20 years that amassed over 238 million in discretionary funding and questionable judgement regarding not instituting bond tax increases that were voted on years ago.)
UCPS has always had trailers and for the foreseeable future will continue to have trailers. The mantra coming from the BOE at the time was "trailers are a liability, therefore need to be minimized as best as possible".

1009 was the top of the enrollment. As people (CAPS) like to point out when they wanted to remain at NTES, CMS schools, specifically HawkRidge ES, was well over that by 100's of students and still functioned fine. Can't have it both ways. There are way less trailers in use today in UCPS than in 2005-2013.

My opinion, which counts for nothing, says anything over 450 students in an elementary causes the vibe of the school to change and presents the possibility that education may suffer. Nothing I can point to in cold hard facts, but gut feeling. (I should know, I probably spent more time in K-6 than most of you...lol)
In Union County, nothing can be done about keeping elementary school attendance low. If that was done we'd have a school on every corner. Just look now at current schools. Shiloh and Sun Valley ES on the same property with Sardis three miles away. Rea View and Marvin with 2 miles of each other. Antioch, Indian Trail, and Weddington in a 6 or 7 mile triangle. Commissioners refused to approve the purchase of the Cuthbertson property years ago without the BOE consenting to a plan for 4 schools on that property. Whose in charge of population density planning in high growth areas of the county?
While I'm asking questions regarding who did things and why, who scuttled the YMCA on acreage at Cuthbertson? That would have been a win,win,win situation for the Y, for the schools, and for that area of the county.

Ask parents if they want to move their kids. The vast majority will say no regardless of how crowded the school gets. Ask again after a few years in the new school and the vast majority will say no again.
Same answers whether redistricting for newly constructed schools or re-aligning older attendance areas.

*sheepishly steps off soapbox now*
Points taken. I honestly feel like we should "move forward". In the end, I just wanted to point out that there are many (especially new transplants) who continue to ask questions about how we got here. The trailer comment was me being a wise arse - it did become a distraction... and I 100% agree that anyone who thinks to blame the BOE solely for our current situation is sadly misinformed. The BOCC shares the responsibility.

The new forecasts come out next month and so begins the party... The parents will have a voice, a direct line to the committee if you will, via public hearings on the upcoming proposed options. This new process, which may have its own faults to be determined, seems like an infinitely better way to handle it. We will see - I'll pop the popcorn, you bring the beer!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2017, 03:39 PM
 
2,202 posts, read 2,384,156 times
Reputation: 3151
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyKid View Post
Points taken. I honestly feel like we should "move forward". In the end, I just wanted to point out that there are many (especially new transplants) who continue to ask questions about how we got here. The trailer comment was me being a wise arse - it did become a distraction... and I 100% agree that anyone who thinks to blame the BOE solely for our current situation is sadly misinformed. The BOCC shares the responsibility.

The new forecasts come out next month and so begins the party... The parents will have a voice, a direct line to the committee if you will, via public hearings on the upcoming proposed options. This new process, which may have its own faults to be determined, seems like an infinitely better way to handle it. We will see - I'll pop the popcorn, you bring the beer!
ABSOLUTELY! There is always a better way to do things. I've been around too long to think it's my way or the highway!

You, a wise arse? Can't be!! Tell me it ain't so. Anonymous people on an internet forum only TRUMPeting "Believe me!!!" Never happen!

Got to be a better way to handle it. The American way, add another level of bureaucracy right? Always hard to pin the blame on the donkey when there are several jack----s in the mix.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2017, 01:24 PM
 
631 posts, read 738,411 times
Reputation: 305
Seems to be a much better process this time. At least on the surface. I liked the presentation and maps shared so we can see what they are starting with. Guessing on the maps that ~80% of the assignments will be easy no-brainers. The other 20% that are in between very different schools, or those bumped out to the 1st closest school due to capacity will cause all the noise and arguments. Then we'll see the true colors of the BOE and advisory committee. Will they accept the recommended results? And of course, there will probably be a powerpoint asking "who lives here?". At least it's a lot more transparent so far!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 10:47 AM
 
161 posts, read 153,186 times
Reputation: 110
Default McKibben report

Looks like they need to move boundary lines back to east, to move the back kids to the west. Or in other words, undo the damage done by the previous board. Who would have ever guessed? What a cluster.

https://youtu.be/ESf-Ow1jXDA
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 11:04 AM
 
2,202 posts, read 2,384,156 times
Reputation: 3151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rancher4life View Post
Looks like they need to move boundary lines back to east, to move the back kids to the west. Or in other words, undo the damage done by the previous board. Who would have ever guessed? What a cluster.

https://youtu.be/ESf-Ow1jXDA
Has there been a plan posted?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2017, 11:08 AM
 
161 posts, read 153,186 times
Reputation: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by getatag View Post
Has there been a plan posted?
I believe that's beginning tonight. McKibben was very clear about the need to move the lines back toward the east, to bring the numbers back up in the west.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



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
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:43 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