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 03-12-2018, 08:13 AM
 
631 posts, read 736,163 times
Reputation: 305

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MB in NC View Post
Based on the projections of folks that most people feel are full of monkey dung?
HA! Yeah, they are full of monkey dung. But the decline is happening regardless.

It's a pattern with people staying in their homes. A new development opens up and the primary buyers are families with kids (or about to have kids). Those kids go through school, graduate, and the parents stay. Less empty nesters sell and move on than those that stay put. They've either paid off or are close to paying off their house and don't want to go through that hassle again, plus it has become home. Happens all across the country.

Take Rea View since it was a hot topic this year. Hunter Oaks and Somerset were built around the same time in the late 90s and there was a massive influx of young families with kids (over 700 homes I think). That area used to be zoned to Weddington, but then Marvin Elem was built and packed, then Rea View was built. It too was packed when it opened. Now it has lots of empty classrooms. The houses in that area will flip fast because of the location and schools, but many parents are still there after the kids are off to school.

You'll see the same effect with Millbridge, Lawson, Cureton, etc. in 10-15 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-12-2018, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Union County
5,783 posts, read 8,411,807 times
Reputation: 4818
Quote:
Originally Posted by MB in NC View Post
Based on the projections of folks that most people feel are full of monkey dung?
I think you may be looking at this wrong... Don't confuse the county wide picture with the school by school projections. Total seats in the county versus a declining enrollment is what I am referring to. We know that even with all the house building we see that the actual totals in the schools are going down. So, there isn't enough development to even maintain at this point - county wide. With more charters opening and existing charters expanding, less families will be using public school. So as a whole, we won't be building more schools and it's likely schools will be closing in the future. Those numbers are not really disputable at this point.

The exact details of where this will happen within the county is where it gets fuzzy... which schools will be impacted the most and thus needed to be "loaded up" by the redistricting, which ones needed more relief than others, etc. That's your "monkey dung" - school by school assignments based on estimates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2018, 09:05 AM
 
22 posts, read 9,283 times
Reputation: 25
You both did notice the (?) at the end of my post, right?

Continue....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2018, 09:41 AM
 
43 posts, read 46,482 times
Reputation: 83
Serious question - do you not think the enrollment decline is directly related in large part to the redistricting debacle of 2014? There was an exodus from UCPS of those who refused to send their kids to certain schools and entered charter or private schools as a result. So, if this is true, it is less of a "population problem" and more of a reaction to BOE decision-making that left people wanting more control of where their children attend school. I understand all the boomer/bust/boomlet history, and I do not at all dismiss that. I'm just not convinced that accounts for such a quick concern for decline in such a short time in this particular situation/location. I'm just curious to hear thoughts on that because I don't think it is responsible to look at enrollment numbers in a vacuum and make such grand decisions based on them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2018, 01:04 PM
 
22 posts, read 9,283 times
Reputation: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by hope923 View Post
Serious question - do you not think the enrollment decline is directly related in large part to the redistricting debacle of 2014? There was an exodus from UCPS of those who refused to send their kids to certain schools and entered charter or private schools as a result. So, if this is true, it is less of a "population problem" and more of a reaction to BOE decision-making that left people wanting more control of where their children attend school. I understand all the boomer/bust/boomlet history, and I do not at all dismiss that. I'm just not convinced that accounts for such a quick concern for decline in such a short time in this particular situation/location. I'm just curious to hear thoughts on that because I don't think it is responsible to look at enrollment numbers in a vacuum and make such grand decisions based on them.
Agreed.

Another factor in this mass exodus could be resale value . Many folks who moved to UC for their kids may not want to sell now that their kids are off to college. You've got empty-nesters who aren't getting top dollar for that 4 bedroom cream-puff because most folks would rather spend the same $ on new construction. Is anyone forecasting for when the RE market levels off down the road?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2018, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Union County
5,783 posts, read 8,411,807 times
Reputation: 4818
Quote:
Originally Posted by hope923 View Post
Serious question - do you not think the enrollment decline is directly related in large part to the redistricting debacle of 2014? There was an exodus from UCPS of those who refused to send their kids to certain schools and entered charter or private schools as a result. So, if this is true, it is less of a "population problem" and more of a reaction to BOE decision-making that left people wanting more control of where their children attend school. I understand all the boomer/bust/boomlet history, and I do not at all dismiss that. I'm just not convinced that accounts for such a quick concern for decline in such a short time in this particular situation/location. I'm just curious to hear thoughts on that because I don't think it is responsible to look at enrollment numbers in a vacuum and make such grand decisions based on them.
No, I do not think the enrollment decline is directly related to redistricting in 2014... and I disagree with your assessment that it is less of a "population problem". IMO you're applying a faulty correlation and overemphasizing the redistrict while under emphasizing the county turnover. Did some families pull their kids out of public schools (home school, charters, private) and did some sell and move because of what happened in 2014? Absolutely... but to say a majority of what we're seeing enrollment wise is due to that? I think that's a serious stretch.

The real crazy part is that the forecasts for the schools coming out of the last redistricting aren't that far off from today's actuals. 4 years later and the forecasts made back then for some schools are off by quite a bit (i.e. New Town), most are within reasonable plus/minus, and some were dead on. I believe if folks went back and looked they would be surprised how close they were overall in forecasting the current enrollment by school. It wasn't as off you might think.

The main issue = Marvin. McK's population study last time stated that Marvin was aging out, but in the face of a capped Marvin MS the previous board pulled way too many communities out of Marvin and over reconfigured the other clusters off of that. Now, with McK saying essentially the same thing, this board is sending the same communities plus more back into Marvin and re-re-configuring the other clusters off of that. The irony that Marvin was/is ground zero for BOTH redistrictings (in exactly OPPOSITE directions) is comical to say the least. This is why so many of us talk in terms of both redistricting being too big.

That all said, even if I'm wrong and you're right - let's attribute the enrollment decline to the redistricting in 2014... it's now the previous board's fault. Done. Sadly, I don't see how that changes anything. This new redistricting is definitely not going to give families any sense that there is assignment stability in the county going forward. So, more than likely families will continue to pull their kids out... more home schooling, more charter, more private. Under your thought that redistricting causes this, this new one would likely accelerate the enrollment decline even faster now. In the end, whatever we blame it on... the net impact will be the same - schools closing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2018, 09:17 AM
 
Location: The Greater Booger Branch Area
139 posts, read 108,421 times
Reputation: 292
I’m not sure why anyone would use the term “ population problem” in conjunction with enrollment decline. As in, I don’t see enrollment decline as a bad thing. I don’t see why the prospect of closing schools as opposed to building more new, shiny schools in the densely populated areas of NW UC is a bad thing. Maybe, just maybe when this madness slows down, areas that have had stable population for many decades like Prospect, can get a new school. Or at least an upgraded septic system that has been needing done for a couple decades. Has anyone on this thread ever driven out to Prospect to see the prominently placed, undersized, above ground splendor that is the septic system? And on the subject of Prospect, have any of those who complain about long trips to elementary schools ever looked on the map at how huge the Prospect sending area is? I know that this is primarily a realtor site, but Union County and it’s citizens do not exist to finance more and more attractive schools in your high profit margin areas.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2018, 09:38 AM
 
1,453 posts, read 993,629 times
Reputation: 1669
Declining school enrollment growth is a trend across the country and will materialize here in the Charlotte area as well eventually. Migration from out of state is somewhat offsetting the lower birth rates that would result in the organic declines being seen in most other parts of the country. Eventually re-location growth from out of state will slow or not be enough to offset a lower percentage of people having kids.

Young 30 somethings in Mecklenburg County getting married, having children, and moving to Union County to raise a family is going to slow as well compared to the previous generation. The next generation is getting married later, delaying having children (if at all), and not as inclined to long commutes / exurb living. It will be interesting to see if this trend reverses, but current data shows Union County is getting older and not replacing 25 - 39 year olds that would have children in lower elementary school as fast as current residents age. High school/ middle school enrollment strength vs. declining elementary shows that many re-locating to the area already have children that are older, indicating elementary needs might not be as critical going forward.

In the 2009 Census, 20.8% of the population in Union County was 25 - 39 years old (peak years for having babies).

Fast forward to 2016 and the Census shows only 15.7% of Union County is 25 - 39 years old. So over those years the county median has risen from 35.2 to 37.7 years old. The 41.9% of the county that is over 40 years old is transitioning out of prime years for having children.
- Also, despite the population of Union County growing 19.6% from 2009 to 2016, the percentage of the population that are young children under 5 years old has declined from 8.1% to 6.1%, resulting in a decline of 1,455 people under the age of 5 from 2009 to 2016. The trend has steadily been dropping and will likely drop to under 6% by 2018 Census estimates.

In Mecklenburg County in 2009 25.9% of the population was 25 - 39 years old and the median age was 33.7. Fast forward to today and 24.2% of the population is 25-39 years old.

Both CMS and Union County are starting to see school population level out in certain areas. Compound that with Caucasians are having less children and delaying having them, and Union County is a majority white school district, and you see how there are lots of macro demographic changes that show how things are going to change in Charlotte and nationwide.

Last edited by CLT4; 03-13-2018 at 09:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2018, 10:12 AM
 
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
21,872 posts, read 27,138,998 times
Reputation: 8938
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLT4 View Post
Declining school enrollment growth is a trend across the country and will materialize here in the Charlotte area as well eventually. Migration from out of state is somewhat offsetting the lower birth rates that would result in the organic declines being seen in most other parts of the country. Eventually re-location growth from out of state will slow or not be enough to offset a lower percentage of people having kids.

Young 30 somethings in Mecklenburg County getting married, having children, and moving to Union County to raise a family is going to slow as well compared to the previous generation. The next generation is getting married later, delaying having children (if at all), and not as inclined to long commutes / exurb living. It will be interesting to see if this trend reverses, but current data shows Union County is getting older and not replacing 25 - 39 year olds that would have children in lower elementary school as fast as current residents age. High school/ middle school enrollment strength vs. declining elementary shows that many re-locating to the area already have children that are older, indicating elementary needs might not be as critical going forward.

In the 2009 Census, 20.8% of the population in Union County was 25 - 39 years old (peak years for having babies).

Fast forward to 2016 and the Census shows only 15.7% of Union County is 25 - 39 years old. So over those years the county median has risen from 35.2 to 37.7 years old. The 41.9% of the county that is over 40 years old is transitioning out of prime years for having children.
- Also, despite the population of Union County growing 19.6% from 2009 to 2016, the percentage of the population that are young children under 5 years old has declined from 8.1% to 6.1%, resulting in a decline of 1,455 people under the age of 5 from 2009 to 2016. The trend has steadily been dropping and will likely drop to under 6% by 2018 Census estimates.

In Mecklenburg County in 2009 25.9% of the population was 25 - 39 years old and the median age was 33.7. Fast forward to today and 24.2% of the population is 25-39 years old.

Both CMS and Union County are starting to see school population level out in certain areas. Compound that with Caucasians are having less children and delaying having them, and Union County is a majority white school district, and you see how there are lots of macro demographic changes that show how things are going to change in Charlotte and nationwide.
That's it. My former town built out in the 60s & 70s. By the late 70s, when the building slowed the school population started slowing. The country was well into the baby bust/Gen X.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2018, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Union County
5,783 posts, read 8,411,807 times
Reputation: 4818
Quote:
Originally Posted by CLT4 View Post
Declining school enrollment growth is a trend across the country and will materialize here in the Charlotte area as well eventually. Migration from out of state is somewhat offsetting the lower birth rates that would result in the organic declines being seen in most other parts of the country. Eventually re-location growth from out of state will slow or not be enough to offset a lower percentage of people having kids.

Young 30 somethings in Mecklenburg County getting married, having children, and moving to Union County to raise a family is going to slow as well compared to the previous generation. The next generation is getting married later, delaying having children (if at all), and not as inclined to long commutes / exurb living. It will be interesting to see if this trend reverses, but current data shows Union County is getting older and not replacing 25 - 39 year olds that would have children in lower elementary school as fast as current residents age. High school/ middle school enrollment strength vs. declining elementary shows that many re-locating to the area already have children that are older, indicating elementary needs might not be as critical going forward.

In the 2009 Census, 20.8% of the population in Union County was 25 - 39 years old (peak years for having babies).

Fast forward to 2016 and the Census shows only 15.7% of Union County is 25 - 39 years old. So over those years the county median has risen from 35.2 to 37.7 years old. The 41.9% of the county that is over 40 years old is transitioning out of prime years for having children.
- Also, despite the population of Union County growing 19.6% from 2009 to 2016, the percentage of the population that are young children under 5 years old has declined from 8.1% to 6.1%, resulting in a decline of 1,455 people under the age of 5 from 2009 to 2016. The trend has steadily been dropping and will likely drop to under 6% by 2018 Census estimates.

In Mecklenburg County in 2009 25.9% of the population was 25 - 39 years old and the median age was 33.7. Fast forward to today and 24.2% of the population is 25-39 years old.

Both CMS and Union County are starting to see school population level out in certain areas. Compound that with Caucasians are having less children and delaying having them, and Union County is a majority white school district, and you see how there are lots of macro demographic changes that show how things are going to change in Charlotte and nationwide.
ez now - introducing facts into this discussion may be frowned upon!
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 03:31 AM.

© 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