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.
Well, I agree with you about La Joya. They have about $500 of my own personal money in speeding tickets and they're known throughout the valley for their largess, so it should be noted that they are an exception. The other stuff we're not going to agree on. You're painting a picture of one of the wealthiest zip codes in all of the Houston metro area as if it's weak and vulnerable and needs special allotments to maintain its privilege. That's not true. It is also not true that wealthy people get that way because of care in planning and attention to things like education. They get that way usually because they already were that way--even more than in socialist countries, according to most studies. Working class, poor and middle class families all want a good education for their kids.
The south of I-10 would lose more than half its value if you gerrymandered the school zoning. Literally every person I know that has kids in SBISD on the south side, bought there for the schools and only the schools. If HISD had good schools areas like the Heights would be 2-3x more expensive. I've lost count of the number of people I know who started in midtown, or the heights, and eventually left for the memorial area b/c of schools. The schools are driving the value, not the other way around.
Sometimes you gotta take a hit today for the long-term good of everyone. That being said, there's no stopping private schools, which is where people in the area would flood if they started trying to make all the SBISD schools equal.
The south of I-10 would lose more than half its value if you gerrymandered the school zoning. Literally every person I know that has kids in SBISD on the south side, bought there for the schools and only the schools. If HISD had good schools areas like the Heights would be 2-3x more expensive. I've lost count of the number of people I know who started in midtown, or the heights, and eventually left for the memorial area b/c of schools. The schools are driving the value, not the other way around.
I don't think they'd lose more than half of their value. Homes zoned to bad schools in Spring Branch are going up in value right now. But the bigger question is what value is displaced by hoarding the good schools to half of the school district. That also takes away, not just in real estate value, but also in other measurable areas, like quality of education. The problem with your argument is that it relies on this idea that the wealthy can keep all their wealth and hopefully some day, the poor will be wealthy like that, too, but that's not an economically sound argument. It implies that there is enough wealth for everyone, if only people would figure out how to get it. In fact, wealth, like any resource, is limited. So if one side of the highway has 90 cookies and the other side has 10 cookies for the same number of people, there is no real possibility of going beyond that number. There's always a limit in any economy, and then it's just about distribution. Right now, the distribution in SBISD is very imbalanced. It won't change any time soon. The wealthy have the power and they're not going to let it go. They just shouldn't pretend it's anything else.
Sometimes you gotta take a hit today for the long-term good of everyone. That being said, there's no stopping private schools, which is where people in the area would flood if they started trying to make all the SBISD schools equal.
Many of the most wealthy would certainly flock to private, but half or more of the people would not be able to afford to stay in the area and goto private school. Property taxes are near $30K/yr for most people south of I-10...and school is $20K or more depending on the grade....I know alot of people who stretched their housing budget just to get the school...most would not be able to cover both expenses.
And nobody would be willing to take a hit on the property, and their schools when the answer does not lie in the school..it lies in the parents....all the money, and gerrymandering in the world can't fix a parent who does not have the time/ability to reinforce education on their kids.
I don't think they'd lose more than half of their value. Homes zoned to bad schools in Spring Branch are going up in value right now. But the bigger question is what value is displaced by hoarding the good schools to half of the school district. That also takes away, not just in real estate value, but also in other measurable areas, like quality of education. The problem with your argument is that it relies on this idea that the wealthy can keep all their wealth and hopefully some day, the poor will be wealthy like that, too, but that's not an economically sound argument. It implies that there is enough wealth for everyone, if only people would figure out how to get it. In fact, wealth, like any resource, is limited. So if one side of the highway has 90 cookies and the other side has 10 cookies for the same number of people, there is no real possibility of going beyond that number. There's always a limit in any economy, and then it's just about distribution. Right now, the distribution in SBISD is very imbalanced. It won't change any time soon. The wealthy have the power and they're not going to let it go. They just shouldn't pretend it's anything else.
What is the good half? The buildings with the exception of Frostwood are mostly very old. The curriculum is the same, the books are the same....what makes one side better?
The difference is the students....but all kids are born equal...so why are the wealthy schools better? Its because of the parents. They have the time to spend with their kids to force them to do their work and keep them out of trouble. An involved parent is all it takes to create a successful child. A community of involved parents creates a successful school.
There is plenty of wealth to go around, most people just are not willing to sacrifice current desires for future wealth. Delayed gratification is one of the most common attributes among those who are not born wealthy but become so.
Many of the most wealthy would certainly flock to private, but half or more of the people would not be able to afford to stay in the area and goto private school. Property taxes are near $30K/yr for most people south of I-10...and school is $20K or more depending on the grade....I know alot of people who stretched their housing budget just to get the school...most would not be able to cover both expenses.
And nobody would be willing to take a hit on the property, and their schools when the answer does not lie in the school..it lies in the parents....all the money, and gerrymandering in the world can't fix a parent who does not have the time/ability to reinforce education on their kids.
But the money allows the individual schools to reinforce education on the kids, when the parents can't/won't. And the school discrepancy is not about the books and the curriculum - it's the teachers and the resources they are gifted. The best teachers go where they are treated the best -- wealthy schools bring them lunches and gifts and "no playground duty" days all year long. Parents privately fund full-time positions and extra resources that the low income zone schools don't get. Parents privately fund playground renovations to the tune of $100,000.
The "delayed gratification" you speak of applies to you too -- you and me and everyone in Houston would benefit eventually if we lift up the lower class kids and give them better options. You speak the truth: a lot of their parents will not give them options. But that becomes your problem and my problem when those kids turn to dealing drugs and committing crimes to make their way. If you're right that their parents aren't going to teach them, then someone has to.
(And my point about private school was that the very wealthy will always find a way to keep themselves and their wealth separate from the rest. I'm not proposing a solution; only saying that you can't keep repeating "if only their parents will do better" and make it magically happen.)
Politics aside, the schools north of 10 do have challenges that the schools south of 10 don't (like a large ESL population and a higher amount of low income kids) and it would be nice if those populations could be spread out more over the district evenly but that is not how our educational systems is set up. That said, Valley Oaks was a title 1 school about 10 years ago and today it is on par with the "south I-10 schools". Schools can and do improve when people stay in an area versus moving to a preexisting good school feeder pattern.
Personally I think SBISD does a great job of reinvesting the funds they do have and at the moment I would send my kid to a lower rated SBISD school just to avoid the dysfunction in HISD. Lots of the "north of I-10" schools are actually hidden gems in the district, especially on the elementary level, even if Greatschools doesn't say so.
To the person who asked about Westchester:
Westchester International (along with Cornerstone Middle and Landrum KIPP program) are district wide lottery schools (my kid was 197th and 196th on both waiting lists if that tells you anything). My understanding is you have to be in district or an employee's child to apply, it's done on-line in Jan with the results announced late Feb. They are fantastic programs but are slated for kids on the AP track (there are grade miniums to apply and remain in the school) and have limited after school activities.
Many of the most wealthy would certainly flock to private, but half or more of the people would not be able to afford to stay in the area and goto private school. Property taxes are near $30K/yr for most people south of I-10...and school is $20K or more depending on the grade....I know alot of people who stretched their housing budget just to get the school...most would not be able to cover both expenses.
And nobody would be willing to take a hit on the property, and their schools when the answer does not lie in the school..it lies in the parents....all the money, and gerrymandering in the world can't fix a parent who does not have the time/ability to reinforce education on their kids.
You act like the south side of I-10 is the only one paying high taxes. This is the same stupid attitude they had when I was going to Northbrook in the ‘80s and they closed down Spring Branch High School and routed all those apartments right by Memorial HS all the way to Northbrook. Do you even realize how you sound?
Last edited by katygirl68; 06-07-2018 at 06:27 PM..
When it comes to school zoning / rezoning decisions, what people paid for their home (and how much they pay in taxes) should have absolutely no influence on the decisions. Just because someone paid a high price for their home to be zoned to a school with certain demographics, does not at all mean that the district is obligated to preserve those demographics at that school.
But the money allows the individual schools to reinforce education on the kids, when the parents can't/won't. And the school discrepancy is not about the books and the curriculum - it's the teachers and the resources they are gifted. The best teachers go where they are treated the best -- wealthy schools bring them lunches and gifts and "no playground duty" days all year long. Parents privately fund full-time positions and extra resources that the low income zone schools don't get. Parents privately fund playground renovations to the tune of $100,000.
The "delayed gratification" you speak of applies to you too -- you and me and everyone in Houston would benefit eventually if we lift up the lower class kids and give them better options. You speak the truth: a lot of their parents will not give them options. But that becomes your problem and my problem when those kids turn to dealing drugs and committing crimes to make their way. If you're right that their parents aren't going to teach them, then someone has to.
(And my point about private school was that the very wealthy will always find a way to keep themselves and their wealth separate from the rest. I'm not proposing a solution; only saying that you can't keep repeating "if only their parents will do better" and make it magically happen.)
So you think money solves, or at least alleviates the problem? If you believe that, then the real push should be in Austin to end Robin Hood. Robin Hood is a disaster that diverts money badly needed in the larger cities to rural areas who have far different needs.
I don't personally think money solves the problems...don't get me wrong, it helps, but a school can only teach good behavior, morals, accountability but if its not reinforced at home, its all for nothing. Parents must be involved. Its the only solution...until parents take back responsibility for raising their own children and stop relying upon the schools to do so, nothing will get better.
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.
