Redistricting Feedback

Stonegate kids should go to Walden, not Lakeview for Middle School

I'm not in favor of this scenario because our kids will go to Union Chapel and Park Hill South, only to be separated from their Union Chapel friends for 3 years at Lakeview, then returned to the same group of peers from elementary school for their high school years. Our neighborhood of Stonegate currently only has 6 kids at Union Chapel, 1 kid at Plaza, 2 kids at Lakeview, and 2 kids at Park Hill South. We do not have enough children in this neighborhood to warrant separating them from elementary peers for the middle school years.

SES discrepancy that goes against Park Hill's creed

Southeast parent here. When we moved from another state three years ago, we intentionally chose SE for its diversity. When SES skews so far to one elementary, however, it affects the education of every student. As referenced several times in the comment thread, anything above 40% f/r lunch may start to impact our children who attend. Also, will our kids not be at a disadvantage academically when they merge with other elementary students in middle and high schools? Finally, as a substitute teacher for the district, I think it's doing a disservice to our students to not have more equitable boundary lines. Unless there will be significantly more resources given to those schools with much higher f/r lunch numbers, we will face staff burnout and fatigue from some fabulous educators.

Great plan for Blair Heights

I understand that keeping our kids at Hawthorn is not an option, but of the options, this works the best for Blair Heights. The school is closer, making for shorter bus times. And the kids will be able to go on to MS and HS with their classmates.

The SES balance in this plan is disturbing. To have the lowest F/R lunch population at 15.6% and the highest at 45.8%. Research has

been done to show that tipping the F/R lunch numbers above 40% in a school can have negative impacts on students and teachers. This scenario puts 2 of our schools above that mark. Also, why cut out just the Downtown Parkville Area from Graden?

De factor segregation

Unintentionally, per Board considering factors higher priority, both A1 and B2 would be considered, in my opinion, de factor segregation. These scenarios based on socioeconomic percentages segregate kids from one side of town from the other. Also, I believe, that these 2 scenarios were given so Line Creek and Southeast would be happy with A2 and B1 socioeconomic percentage and not fight for more diversity. The Board, not the committee, needs to step up and take responsibility for these scenarios. The Board saw all of these scenarios before they went public and didn't do anything about it. It appears they want people to blame the committee and not take responsibility. Remember they were voted in by us and need to do their job. I encourage people to add their opinions to this site but also email Board members with their concern. All Board members should visit and talk to teachers at Line Creek and Southeast individually to see what impact high percentages of socioeconomic numbers have on student learning and what other problems occur in the classroom.

This isn't a viable high school solution and the grade school differences are too significant when it comes to free/reduced lunch.

Park Hill South should be equal or greater than PHHS in numbers as north will continue to grow faster.

This Scenario does work for us.

I'm dismayed to see all four of these scenarios cut Shelly Estates from Union Chapel's boundaries.

My home is the only one in the whole subdivision with a child under the age of 13; what good does it do to cut this tiny subdivision of 12 houses out of UC's boundaries? My son loves Union Chapel, and he'd be heartbroken to leave.

Strongly opposition to A2

Is not good for the kids more costly bus ride, separation of a neighborhood, no significant savings for the district

Please put Blair Heights at Graden

The Blair Heights neighborhood kids in this scenario would be moved away from their peers Hawthorn to Prairie Point and then would go to Lakeview with very few of their Prairie Point peers. Putting our small group of kids (about 20) at Graden would make for a much more consistent experience for them.

Bad Idea B1

Mayor cost in bus rides, no significance savings for the school district, and affecting children distance from future MS location.

Scenario B distribution

I don't see this scenario as balancing elementary school boundaries as children should go to the school within closest proximity to where they live. I know that the board has to review options based on different stats but please consider the combination of population and distance relative for children to their schools to avoid unnecessary risk.

B1 has the best balance SES score. Redistricting is a difficult process and I would like to thank the committee for all their hard work.

Best SES Balance (with proposed fix)

This scenario has the best SES balance. For the Montebella problem, there's an easy fix. There are several apartments in downtown Riverside that go to English Landing and then are the only areas from EL going to Walden. Montebella has the reverse, in that it goes to SE and then is the only neighborhood from SE going to Lakeview. Switching those two would fix that problem for both. Additionally, it likely improves both SES and enrollment balance at the middle school level.

I'm dismayed to see all four scenarios cut Shelly Estates out of Union Chapel's boundaries by a matter of yards.

My home is the only one in the whole subdivision with a child under the age of 13; what good does it do to cut this tiny subdivision of 12 houses out of UC's boundaries? My son loves Union Chapel, and he'd be heartbroken to leave.

PLEASE allow more time and come up with some better options.

What do you all think is going to happen to Line Creek and Southeast. Don't you want the same opportunities and learning experience for ALL kids in Park Hill?? Let's also think about the teachers at these schools if this scenario happens. There has to be a better option.

Southeast to Line Creek makes no sense

Moving our neighborhood Sunpointe Village (I29 & 56th St) from Southeast to Line Creek makes no sense. There is not an easy way for us to get to Line Creek and the commute is going to be terrible. We will have to get on the highway and drive all the way through Riverside to get there OR go the back way and drive past Hopewell to get to Line Creek.

When looking at Hampton/Porter Rd. area this is the ONLY map that does NOT split one subdivision into 6-7 bus routes for a rural area.

Distance

I can appreciate that this is a difficult process and not everyone is going to be "happy" with the outcome. With that said, driving distance should be taken into account, not "as the crow flys".

Please consider adjusting the southern boundary of secondary school lines back to 64th Street

The middle/high school line of B1 & B2 scenarios is drawn using a one-way side road that connects to an internal street within Park Hills' drawn lines. Busses would need to drive through streets within Park Hill lines on Bryan, Waukomis, and Green Hills. If the line is kept at 64th Street, it would ensure simple, efficient bus routing systems that wouldn't overlap routes. The maps showing population counts of both current students living in that area, as well as children under the age of 5, report this entire area as not having many children (North-Bryan Rd, East-Waukomis, South-64th Street, West-Green Hills) - less than 77 children. Plaza is a the lowest capacity of middle schools within the district and could take these kids.

Just another neighborhood perspective...

I fully respect and appreciate the complexity of a project like this where there is little black and white... and a plethora of variables to tend to. This additional plan would send our children to a different MS than all of the previous plans. However, we are absolutely fine with whatever decision is ultimately made. One thing that gives us comfort is that care has been taken to ensure the equity and consistency of the PHSD brand and experience across the entire organization. This is a wise move because it keeps parents like us satisfied regardless of the school our kids ultimately attend. The only thing I would add off note from a neighborhood perspective, is the fact that this particular scenario features a split down the rather artificial Thousand Oaks/Hidden Valley line between two adjoining densely-populated neighborhoods. TO/HV are in many ways one densely-populated "island" neighborhood surrounded by a relative sea of lightly populated Platte County. We have zero preference for a particular MS. I only wonder whether the advantages gained in that split outweigh the disadvantages. Just an additional qualitative data point to consider.......

Call For Additional Scenarios Based on Altered Criteria

I am interested in seeing options that take SES equity into account MORE than distance from your current school. I think the district should pivot and alter the criteria so equity is a real priority rather than simply rhetoric. We, as a community, should be able to consider what the travel component would look like if we made all schools in our district hover around 29% free or reduced lunch (which is about what equalizing across all schools would translate to). The issue here is not needing more scenarios, it's changing the criteria. Shortest distance and economic equity cannot co-exist, which is why we keep seeing iterations of the same lack-luster scenario.

25% difference in FRL rates is unacceptable

Plan A isn't equitable nor does it address the issues with high school overcrowding

Please reconsider what was asked of you at both the open house and on Park Hill Listens. This is a poor attempt at making it better.

SES numbers are slightly better however this can be improved just by looking at B5. But you took the norther boarder of LC and placed them in Hopewell and SE when those communities clearly have access to LC and took Houston Lake, Sunpointe, and part of Breen Hills still going to LC that have to again drive past 2 other schools to get to LC or merge onto a highway. Clearly you did not Listen. This clearly needs more time to develop better plans.

Grandfather current 7th graders to prevent 4 moves in 4 years

I would like to request grandfathering of current 7th graders (eighth grade next year). My daughter will be changing schools 4 times within 4 years. It is really important that these kids have some stability at this age. It is not enough to just say, "Principals will reach out to new students," and "their peers will be in the same situation," because most of their peers will NOT be in the same situation. Please let current 7th graders stay in their current school if parents provide transportation.

Transportation issues! Reconsider Monticello please!

I did not previously think of this; Monticello has only ONE entrance/exit. At present English Landign is walking distance for Monticello while Graden is next closest. With only ONE entrance/exit to Monticello this makes it physically more difficult for buses to get from Monticello to Prairie Point. Please reconsider Monticello.

B5 Middle School Scenario

The middle school scenario for B5 does a good job of eliminating the small groups of students who move to a different middle school than the remainder of their elementary school peers (e.g., Montebella students being only ones from Southeast to move to Lakeview). What about combining this middle school plan with B1 elementary plan, which has the best SES balance?

Why are the Hampton Woods kids going to PP? Already go to Graden, our house is at least a half mile closer, bus times are longer; senseless

Please reconsider Blair Heights going to Graden

We've already been moved to Hawthorn, where are kids know very few that they will go to MS and HS with.. now we are facing PP.. same situation different building. We are closest to Graden, EVERY scenario gives us Lakview and South.. please consider giving us the school closest to our home, with kids our kids will know in MS and HS. It isn't fair to be moved, just to be in the same (non direct feed pattern) situation we are currently in. Please give some thought to those of us who have already been moved in 2012 and no matter what are getting moved in 2019. No scenario leaves us at Hawthorn, please if moving us help us make the best decision for our kids.

B5 is a better option for our children as far as SES AND Transportation. We would have been going past 2 schools OR merging on I29....

Our community would go around into Riverside merging onto I29 in a bus full of elementary school children..........HUGE transportation issue or drive past 2 schools (there is many schools closer LC is not one of them). It looks like on a map that we are next to LC but we are not there are no roads that connect us. Monticello we did consider a zip line...... with MO weather it seems like a poor decision. All jokes aside..............we clearly understand Monticello's issues with B5. I think we are saying overall this is the only option even considering our children's safety. This cannot be the only option here! B5 could be a better starting ground. Seriously the board CAN do better for both communities here. All we are asking is to take more time get this right for all the children.