At this Thursday's School Board meeting, there will be a couple of items presented for information (not action) that I would like to bring to the public's attention.
- It eliminates public involvement in a redistricting committee unless a new school is being built.
- It eliminates the Long Range Planning Committee's role (appointed by School Board with each district having a representative, plus 2 at-large seats) in identifying when a redistricting should take place, except that they still recommend when and where to build new schools in the capital budget (their role replaced by triggers).
- It delegates to staff all responsibility for drawing the boundary lines for redistrictings that don't involve opening a new school (certainly all subject to School Board approval and public feedback in the end)
- It implements one-size-fits-all capacity triggers and gives the impression we will only redistrict when these triggers are met. For example, 110% over capacity at Yancey Elementary and Albemarle High School are not treated differently. It doesn't explain what happens if one school hits 120% (triggering a redistricting) when the schools near by are also at capacity (domino effect). Can those nearby schools face redistricting even though their triggers are not met?
- I think we should define capacity in the policy so it will never be viewed to include mobile classrooms.
- Have we given consideration to other redistricting models used in other school divisions?