Recommendations of the Attendance and Boundary CommitteePresented to the LCISD Board of DirectorsMarch 24, 2009

2

Agenda

• Introduction

• Committee Members• Zoning process• Summary Recommendation

• Issues Considered and Alternatives Considered

• Public Comments

• Detailed Recommendations

• bh

3

Committee MembersFirst Last   First Last   First Last

Glen Nohavitza   Jennifer Hirsch   Debra HelbertBud Whileyman

 Joseph Page

 Melissa Aguilar

Wayne Stone 

Cindy Saha 

Tonya Carter-Clary

Dawn Rodriguez   Danette Fennesy   Melody HolmesKaty Czaikowski

 Cathy Willis

 Beth Peloquin

Renee Patterson   Rachel Todd   Daryl SeguraMichael Garcia   Vickie Schodek   Alba DaneCheryl Wehring

 Thomas Sanchez

 Maria Rochez-Calderon

Judy Roberts   Elizabeth Mercado   Dwayne GrigarSynthia Cantu   Christina Davis   Sylvia GonzalezDe De Alter   Darryl Rock   Rosa CavazosTracy Pruitt   Maha Saeed   Natalie CrumpsKassia Reid

 Shari Baldridge-Foster

 Margarita Medina

Marcia Buck   Jana Kolb   Shanetta MaloneCassandra Blackburn

 Amy Orsak

 Mary Fernandez

Steven Beers   Christa Ross   Ruby ReynaStephen Metoyer   Derek Einkauf   Tracy PhillipsRose Lopez   Tura Wright   Amber SmithJane Veazey

 Terry Hydo

 Deanna Ulrich-Hope

ShaDonna Johnson 

Tammy Armstrong 

Connie Maier

Mike Palmer   Diana Martinez      

4

THE LCISD ZONING PROCESS Revised and Approved by the Board 9/23/04 FACT: Lamar CISD is among the fastest growing school districts in the state. A large number of residential developments are under construction or in the planning stages throughout the LCISD community. The district must continue providing all students with a quality education.

BACKGROUND: In a growing school system, it is inevitable that the

district’s attendance zones will be changed periodically. As new

schools open and population shifts occur, attendance zones will

be adjusted. Each campus in the district is unique and offers

many enrichment opportunities for students. Our goal is to ensure

that all campuses, regardless of location, provide quality programs.

.

5

ZONING OBJECTIVES/CRITERIAThe district’s Framework for Facilities Planning established a need for objectives and criteria to be used to guide zoning decisions. The following 12 objectives should be used when developing new attendance zones. All of the 12 objectives should be given equal weight when making boundary decisions.

1. To draw attendance zones in a way that supports an efficient/effective use of school facilities. 2. To reduce overcrowding of campuses. 3. To plan for future growth. 4. To keep neighborhoods and feeder schools tracking together, as much as possible. 5. To minimize rezoning neighborhoods which have been affected in previous rezoning efforts. 6. To draw secondary zones which reflect the diversity of the district, as much as possible. 7. To consider elementary students’ proximity to a campus, being mindful of traffic patterns that allow for

the safest routes available. 8. To involve the community in defining the objectives/criteria for rezoning. 9. To develop a fair and objective rezoning process. 10. To always keep in mind doing what is in the best interest of students. 11. To communicate zoning information effectively to all students and families that may be impacted. 12. To consider fiscal impact of changes.

6

Membership of the ABC will consist of

– two representatives from each elementary and middle school campus – three representatives from each junior high and high school campus.

The campus administrator will select campus representatives with the entire committee approved by the Board. Appropriate central administrators will serve as resources as needed. District information and the Board’s charge for rezoning considerations will be presented to the entire committee. Only representatives from campuses affected by rezoning and their feeder schools will be involved in making the rezoning recommendations to be presented to the Board. Current Board members cannot serve on the Attendance Boundary Committee.

ATTENDANCE BOUNDARY COMMITTEE MAKE-UP

7

The zoning process

Step 1: The administrative team will present all options to be considered for rezoning. The Board will charge the administration with rezoning priorities to be considered by the ABC and approve the ABC membership roster for that year.

Step 2: Involve parents and community members in the process through the district Attendance Boundary Committee (ABC). The ABC will review the supporting data and options presented by the administration and work to propose possible zoning recommendations for Board consideration and approval.

Step 3: The plan(s) will be shown at a Community Forum(s) for parent input. Step 4: Based on parent input from the Community Forum(s), the ABC will make any needed

modifications to its recommendations. Modified ABC recommendations can be presented orally or in a written format to the Board.

Step 5: Additional Community Forum if needed to allow for parent comments on any ABC changes to the original recommendation.

Step 6: ABC will submit final recommendation to the Board Zoning Committee for input.

Step 7: Zoning plan(s) submitted for Board approval.

8

Master Plan Principles Adopted by the Board May 15, 2003• To maximize enrollment at all campuses:

• Elementary schools - 750 maximum• Middle schools (6) – 750 maximum • Junior high schools (7-8) – 1400 maximum • High schools – 2000 maximum

• To embrace the neighborhood school concept for all elementary students who reside in LCISD. • To house grades PK-5 in all elementary school to insure parents and students that they can enjoy six years of

attending school on the same campus. • To reflect the ethnic balance of the school district in grades 6 – 12. • To locate schools with grades 6 – 12 in the same general area. • To minimize the alteration of high school zones. • To provide adequate space for school/community-based education programs.

9

Current Arial View of Area

10

11

Primary Issues Considered

• Overcrowding of existing schools – Campbell in particular• Population growth per the District demographer• Recalibrate all schools to optimal levels, utilizing district resources more effectively

• Dividing neighborhoods as little as possible• Greatwood must be divided into more than one school, but rest of neighborhoods under

consideration can remain intact• Action now will impact many students – make it count and don’t prolong the pain

• Minimizing future rezoning when new schools are introduced• Populations in the Williams-Thomas area projected to grow while the Campbell/

Dickinson/Velasquez zone expected to remain relatively stagnant• Other important criteria

• Minimizing distance traveled and traffic issues• Considering desires of parents/students if able

12

Alternatives Considered

• In conjunction with District officials, Demographer produced four initial options with populations and growth projections included

• Option 2: Greatwood Verdant Valley/Treeline to Campbell; Summer Lakes, Bridlewood, Canyon Gate zoned to Williams

• Option 3: Greatwood Verdant Valley/Treeline to Dickinson; Bridlewood to Thomas, Canyon Gate to Williams

• Option 4: Greatwood Verdant Valley/Treeline/Stone Arbor/Hillsboro to Campbell; Summer Lakes, Bridlewood, Canyon Gate zoned to Williams

• Note: All options move Brazos Lakes and Royal Lakes from Williams to Velasquez

• Committee requested several more iterations (Options 5, 6 and 7) looking at some of the following scenarios:

13

Alternatives Considered• Options 5-7 (see backup for detailed maps)

Canyon Gate zoned to Velasquez instead of Williams• Increase of 400 students puts Velasquez much higher than capacity, even with moving

Pre-K to Williams• Transportation issues out of Canyon Gate persist – similar distances

Sending Royal Lakes and Brazos Lakes (subdivisions in the George Ranch zone) to Williams rather than Velasquez

• Would need to move these students at a later date to make room at Williams/Thomas• Transportation costs to Williams higher than to Velasquez

Summer Lakes zoned to Williams• 762 traffic patterns make Thomas a safer and less-congestion prone alternative fro

Summer Lakes residents (they would be required to cross RR and 762 at a lightless intersection

• Canyon Gate Options 8 and 9

14

Public Comments

General Area of Public Comments Public Comments ABC Discussion / Review

Distance

• Distance from Canyon Gate to Williams vs. Dickinson

• Greatwood Shores to Campbell vs. Dickinson

All three elementary schools are within 4 miles of each other. Canyon Gate to Williams is approximately 2.5 miles. The current commute from Canyon Gate to Dickinson is about half a mile. Current Greatwood Shores commute to Campbell is approximately six tenths of a mile. By car, Dickinson is about 1 mile further. Via bike/walk trails the Shores is 1.2 miles from Dickinson. The longest distance to be travelled as a result of the rezoning is 2.5 miles from the exit of Canyon Gate. This does not seem unreasonable. Efforts to keep Canyon Gate in one school overweighed any concern regarding distance.

Quality of Facilities

• Concern related to lack of security cameras at Williams

• Concern related to the age and condition of the physical Williams facility

• Lack of Secure Vestibule at Williams

LCISD officials confirmed that Williams has security cameras and will get the secure vestibule over the summer. The ABC could see no evidence of sub optimal facilities at Williams. Nor was the building or its grounds in any disrepair.

Quality of Computers Statements were made regarding the age of Williams computers

LCISD officials confirmed that Williams’ computers are among the districts newest.

Quality of Education / Administration / Staff

Statements were made regarding the quality Williams Staff. No grounds could be indentified to support comments made.

Property ValuesStatements were made that zoning to Williams would cause a devaluation of property in Canyon Gate

While difficult to understand how being zoned to an exemplary school would negatively impact property values, the ABC did not speculate regarding property value impact during the process.

SegregationSeveral Canyon Gate residents stated directly or indirectly that the Canyon Gate rezoning to Williams was motivated by race or social economic factors.

The ABC had no access to any data regarding the race or any other social economic factors. This was not a consideration in our recommendations.

Process Comments were made regarding the publicity of zoning process.

The ABC did comment that more detail could have been presented by the ABC at the start of the public comments meeting.

15

Public Comments

Public Comments Public Comments ABC Discussion / Review

Canyon Gate Residents presented two new zoning options for consideration.

Canyon Gate Option A called for the creation of a 5th grade only campus.

This would call for a change to district policy and was not considered by the ABC.

Canyon Gate Option B called for students moved from Campbell to be place partially at Dickinson and partially at Velasquez.

An option like this had be reviewed by the ABC. It was dropped from consideration due to fact it would have left Velasquez, Campbell and Dickinson with some level of overcrowding. Since Greatwood is reaching the end of growth and new construction, rezoning with any overcrowding would cause additional zoning issues down the road and/or long term overcrowding issues at the three schools. Canyon Gate option B was dropped from consideration.

16

Recommendation Made in Detail

• Resolves overcrowding at Campbell

• Balances the schools• Prepares for long term

growth while limiting the amount of future movement in mature neighborhoods

• Students that are impacted are moving with large populations …. Thus moving with a community rather than small groups

17

ABC Recommendations in Detail

18

Appendix

19

20

21

22

23