Student Realignment Study -Committee Meeting 8- December 4, 2018 1
Meeting Objectives 1. To review survey results 2. Determine if any final adjustments should be made to the options 3. Vote to recommend a realignment plan to be presented to the School Board 2
Review of Timeline Process & Timeline for Demographic and Realignment Planning Study Demographic Study Committee Development (Application and Selection) Redistricting Criteria / Guideline Development Data Collection Data Analysis / Assimilation Internal Logistics Planning with district Background Report Development Baseline Options Development Jan. '18 Feb. '18 Realignment Study Mar. April May June July '18 '18 '18 '18 '18 Aug. Sept. '18 '18 Oct. '18 Nov. '18 Dec. '18 Public Information Session #1: Present Project Process, Criteria, Timeline, and Realignment Objectives to Community. Information meeting to public, without public comments. Committee Meeting 1 - Orientation 5/10 Committee Meeting 2 - Review Background Data, Introduce Baseline Options 5/22 5/9 Committee Meeting 3 - Discuss Background Data & Baseline Options, Q&A 6/26 Committee Meeting 4 - Options Development, Prepare for Public Information Session #2 7/24 Public Information Session #2: Present Preliminary Realignment Options to Community for Comment/Feedback Committee Meeting 5 - Review public input, continue options development Committee Meeting 6 - Continue Options Development Committee Meeting 7 - Options Development, prepare for Public Information Session #3 Public Information Session #3: Present Updated Realignment Options to Community for Comment/Feedback Committee Meeting 8 - Finalize Recommendations & Prepare for Board Presentation We are here 8/28 9/18 10/2 10/16 11/7 12/4 3 Presentation of Final Recommendations to the Board of Education 12/10
Committee s Progress The committee narrowed down to 2 options to present at the November 7 th Public Information Session The options considered at this point are Options I and II Baltimore County Public Schools, March 28, 2017 4 18
Public Input Session Summary of Survey Results: Remember to utilize this feedback as an additional tool as you come to a recommendation. Don t focus on this report solely as the basis for your decision, but remain focused on the overall project objectives and realignment criteria. 5
Public Input Session Summary of Survey Results: About 100 people attended the public input session, and 181 unique respondents participated in the survey. The table shows, however, that participants in the survey aren t evenly distributed across the county. Total Respondents by Live-In Elementary School Zone Live-In Elementary Zone Total Respondents Percent of Respondents A T Allen ES 3 1.66% Bethel ES 1 0.55% Carl A Furr ES 4 2.21% Charles E Boger ES 4 2.21% Cox Mill ES 52 28.73% Harrisburg ES 12 6.63% Mount Pleasant ES 1 0.55% Patriots ES 14 7.73% Pitts School Road ES 60 33.15% R B McAllister ES 1 0.55% W R Odell ES 27 14.92% Weddington Hills ES 1 0.55% Wolf Meadow ES 1 0.55% Total 181 6
Public Info Session Summary of Survey Results: The public was asked about their overall opinion towards an ES Option, along with concerns they had if they opposed any option: Elementary Options Attitude Summary Option Attitude ES Option I ES Option II Approve 121 66.9% 83 45.9% Like 4 2.2% 4 2.2% Neutral 15 8.3% 23 12.7% Dislike 3 1.7% 6 3.3% Oppose 38 21.0% 65 35.9% Total 181 100.0% 181 100.0% If the public opposed an ES Option, they were asked what the main reason was for their opposition: 7 Elementary School Options Primary Concern Summary Prominent Theme ES Option I ES Option II Enrollment Concern 29 70.7% 38 52.8% Demographics Concern 0 0.0% 7 9.7% Feeder Pattern Concern 3 7.3% 3 4.2% Neighborhood Concern 1 2.4% 3 4.2% Other 4 9.8% 15 20.8% Transportation Concern 4 9.8% 6 8.3% Total 41 100.0% 72 100.0%
Public Info Session Summary of Survey Results: The public was asked about their overall opinion towards a MS Option, along with concerns they had if they opposed any option: Middle School Option Attitude Summary Option Attitude MS Option I MS Option II Approve 138 76.2% 68 37.6% Like 7 3.9% 7 3.9% Neutral 18 9.9% 25 13.8% Dislike 4 2.2% 5 2.8% Oppose 14 7.7% 76 42.0% Total 181 100.0% 181 100.0% If the public opposed an MS Option, they were asked what the main reason was for their opposition: Middle School Options Primary Concern Summary Prominent Theme MS Option I MS Option II 8 Enrollment Concern 4 21.1% 31 43.7% Demographics Concern 2 10.5% 6 8.5% Feeder Pattern Concern 5 26.3% 12 16.9% Neighborhood Concern 3 15.8% 5 7.0% Other 2 10.5% 5 7.0% Transportation Concern 3 15.8% 12 16.9% Total 19 100.0% 71 100.0%
Public Info Session Summary of Survey Results: The public was asked about their overall opinion towards a HS Option, along with concerns they had if they opposed any option: High School Option Attitude Summary Option Attitude HS Option I HS Option II Approve 118 65.2% 57 31.5% Like 8 4.4% 7 3.9% Neutral 15 8.3% 16 8.8% Dislike 6 3.3% 8 4.4% Oppose 34 18.8% 93 51.4% Total 181 100.0% 181 100.0% If the public opposed an HS Option, they were asked what the main reason was for their opposition: High School Options Primary Concern Summary Prominent Theme HS Option I HS Option II 9 Enrollment Concern 3 7.0% 6 5.9% Demographics Concern 6 14.0% 15 14.9% Feeder Pattern Concern 18 41.9% 32 31.7% Neighborhood Concern 7 16.3% 16 15.8% Other 5 11.6% 21 20.8% Transportation Concern 4 9.3% 11 10.9% Total 43 100.0% 101 100.0%
Public Info Session Summary of Survey Results: Summaries are also run to show the thoughts of respondents based on the current ES zone they live in. Options for all levels are Rules to Follow summarized by the ES live-in zone for your benefit. ES Option I shown for example to the right. 10 Elementary Option I Attitude Summary by Respondent Live-In Elementary Zone Live-In Zone Approve Like Neutral Dislike Oppose Total Percent Approve Percent Oppose A T Allen ES 3 3 0.0% 100.0% Bethel ES 1 1 0.0% 0.0% Carl A Furr ES 3 1 4 75.0% 0.0% Charles E Boger ES 2 1 1 4 50.0% 25.0% Cox Mill ES 22 1 29 52 42.3% 55.8% Harrisburg ES 12 12 100.0% 0.0% Mount Pleasant ES 1 1 100.0% 0.0% Patriots ES 13 1 14 92.9% 0.0% Pitts School Road ES 47 2 7 1 3 60 78.3% 5.0% R B McAllister ES 1 1 100.0% 0.0% W R Odell ES 20 1 5 1 27 74.1% 3.7% Weddington Hills ES 1 1 0.0% 100.0% Wolf Meadow ES 1 1 0.0% 0.0%
Student Realignment Criteria Rules to Follow The Cabarrus County School Board has approved a set of criteria to follow when evaluating student realignment options. These are rules to follow when considering any potential attendance zone adjustment. The realignment committee will be oriented on these criteria and will follow them as best as possible as they consider realignment options. 11
Student Realignment Criteria Realignment criteria are: Rules to Follow Balance school facility utilization Make every effort to have equitable utilization (where possible) across the district and in accordance with school capacities and funded allotment ratios in accordance with state law. Make efficient use of available space. Account for future growth Allow for increasing attendance in high growth areas. Close Proximity Students should be assigned to the school within the closest proximity to their homes where possible. 12
Student Realignment Criteria Rules to Follow Maximize busing efficiencies in transportation of students Make every effort to account for transportation (school bus and car rider), parent commuting patterns, balance busing travel time, and costs. Establish clear feeder patterns and continuity Make every effort to establish a clear feeder pattern system (especially from middle school to high school), although it may be necessary to split an elementary school to feed to two or more middle schools. Make every effort to divide a large enough population so students can continue to the next level with familiar faces. 13
Student Realignment Criteria Rules to Follow Allow for highest-grade at current school grandfathering Allow for students who will be in the 5th, or 8th grades in the first school year of realignment to stay at their current school, however, transportation will not be provided for these students. Rising 12th graders must stay at their current school as there will not be a senior class in the first year of WCHS. Minimize impact on students Attempt to minimize the amount of students impacted when making boundary adjustments. Consider economic, cultural, and ethnic diversity Ensure schools are inclusionary and not adversely affected by realignment decisions. 14
Student Realignment Criteria Rules to Follow Make every effort to establish contiguous zones Avoid creating zones that are not connected to the primary attendance zone, where possible Use major roads and natural boundaries wherever feasible to define attendance zones Minimize the amount of students who need to cross major roads and other barriers to maximize the safety and security of students, and optimize transportation efficiency by containing bus routes within natural boundaries wherever possible to avoid traffic delays and late arrivals. All criteria are in no particular order or priority, and the best plan is one that touches on all criteria but does not focus solely on one element of the criteria 15
Consideration of changes per public input The following identify considerations per recent comments that have been received, that have not been discussed in detail by the committee. There are communities who continue to be very vocally opposed to the options assignment of their area, that are not listed here because they have been discussed heavily during committee meetings. If there are additional considerations that the committee wants to propose/discuss, they can do so. 16
Consideration of changes per public input Option I Consideration I-a: PB 396 (9 K-5). Moving from AT Allen to Patriots ES Prefer to stay at AT Allen No negative impact on feeders No negative impact on utilization Transportation did indicate this would be best with the other surrounding PB s for efficiency. Consideration I-b: Area near Pitts School Rd feeding to JN Fries MS Prefer to stay at Winkler MS Large numbers would create an imbalance in utilization (Puts Winkler near 100% and Fries goes down to low/mid 80s). Consideration I-c: Legacy Apts (PB 256, 14 6-8) going to NWMS Prefer to stay at Winkler MS If this moves to Winkler, should probably also feed into Weddington ES This area moved out of Weddington ES to help give more relief Consideration I-d: 3% split from Odell ES to NWMS Could keep this area in Boger ES, if you didn t move Winecoff ES PB s to Boger. 17
Consideration of changes per public input Option II Consideration II-a: Small Beverly Hills ES area split to Winkler MS (6%) Could go to NWMS to resolve small split No significant negative impact on utilization Consideration II-b: PB 460 (Small # of students Near HWY 200 and Mt. Pleasant Road) An observed inefficiency not based on public input. Currently, the subdivision feeds entirely to AT Allen ES, then is split b/w Mt Pleasant MS and CC Griffin MS, then entirely goes to Mt. Pleasant HS. Suggest to feed all to AT Allen ES, Mt. Pleasant MS, Mt. Pleasant HS. Consideration II-c: Small split (11%) of Furr ES to Harris Rd MS/Winkler MS (PB 8, 44 6-8) Could consider feeding all Furr ES into Winkler MS Need to be careful about overloading Winkler MS if other considerations are implemented 18
Discussion and Recommendation Committee members review materials and determine if any other adjustments should be considered to either Options I or II. Any suggested refinements will be voted on if there is not consensus. If refinements posed by committee conflict with each other, then another variation of the map may be considered for the final vote. Once all discussions are settled, the committee will vote on a recommendation to be presented to the School Board. 19
Committee Recommendation will be presented to the School Board on Monday, December 10 th Committee is encouraged to attend meeting to show support for recommendation Cabarrus County Schools Education Center @ 6pm 20
Thank you for your commitment and dedication to the Cabarrus County School District! Thank you! 21