People For and Against New D230 Attendance Zones Have Their Say (Video)
Consolidated High School District 230 held a special meeting Tuesday night to explain the rationale behind a plan that would restrict students living in two areas from attending Sandburg, while those against the plan offered their views.
A variety of thoughts were shared Tuesday night about a proposed plan to change Consolidated High School District 230’s attendance boundaries at Center School in Orland Park.
Those for the plan say it will balance out a growing disparity in attendance between Carl Sandburg, Victor J. Andrew and Amos Alonzo Stagg high schools, especially for Andrew, which the district claims could lose certain programs if enrollment keeps falling.
Residents not in favor of the plan found it illogical for students living within walking distance of Sandburg to not be able to attend, and also were concerned about the effect the change could have on property value.
About 875 residents signed a petition against the plan.
Board members Michael Hastings and Kathy Quilty did not attend Tuesday night’s meeting.
The board is scheduled to vote on the plan at the Sept. 27 meeting, starting 7 p.m. at Andrew.
Clarification: Board member Laura Murphy attended the meeting via phone call.
Like Orland Park Patch, Palos Patch and Tinley Park Patch on Facebook.
jmcbmb
1:17 pm on Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Can someone tell me why enrollment is projected to decrease? Are there less kids born during that time? I feel like everyone I know is moving out here so their kids can go to these school districts.
Jim Harmening
8:27 am on Friday, September 21, 2012
The projections are solid, unless we get a huge housing boom. The statistics take into account the number of students in the grammar schools and project the future enrollment. In the past 10 years the numbers have been very close (within 5%) - I like numbers, so I have poured over the statistics.
Rock Bobster
2:04 pm on Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Most studies show that the optimal size for a high school is 750 students. There's absolutely nothing wrong for the students at Andrew attending a school with 1800 students. In fact that number may be better fotr the Andrew students than 2200! The faculty and administration at Andrew are the ones precipitating this boundary change. They want to keep their empire, and overstaffing, intact!
bob busch
9:07 am on Friday, September 21, 2012
Dear Jim
thank you for the information,like I said nobody can predict the future.
But I have a real concern over the present situation if this is actually
an educational problem,why did the district allow Sandburg s enrollment
to get so far above Stagg and Andrew? If balancing the enrollment is
such a problem why is it so unbalanced right now? Sandburg has over one thousand students more than either school.Why didn't the board balance
enrollment five years ago?
One possible reason is money,even if you have the same programs at each school more money goes to Sandburg just by virtue of its enrollment.
Rock Bobster
2:04 pm on Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Demographics, my friend. From a period 25 years ago to about 10 years ago, people starting families and those who'd prospered and earned "something better" were moving to Orland. Then, about 10 years ago, less expensive land, less corrupt governments and lower taxes led those types of people to "leapfrog" Orland and Palos and go to Homer township. Plainfield, Frankfort, Aurora, Naperville, Oswego and even farther out suburbs. That's where those who could afford to move were going.
With the real estate bubble bursting, and unqualified borrowers no longer able to get mortgages, people had to look for more value in their home purchases, and most people chose not to move into Orland or Palos.
In the meantime, more and more of those "empty nesters" who no longer had mortgages were staying in their homes and not vacating them for young families.
It's a cycle we've seen from Burbank, Oak Lawn, and most inner suburbs.
Eventually, new families forming buy homes from those to old to maintain them, while graduating students trail new students coming in.
Poorly run districts often keep spending and taxes high despite dropping enrollments and feed on the tax revenues like carrion on a fallen wildebeast.
Better run districts "right size" for this drop and protect children and taxpayers from gouging by staff and administration.
It appears that 230 is taking the former approach
bob busch
6:44 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
You have the right string but the wrong yo –yo .It seems all the destinations
Of choice you listed have one thing in common. They are outside of Cook
County. I also would like to point out that in the entire state of Illinois only
Cook County taxes residential property at a lower rate than other property.
Everywhere else all property is taxed at 33% of assed value. In Cook County
It can be as low as 16%.A house taxed at $5,000 in Palos would easily be
$9,000 in Naperville.
Those who moved to far flung suburbs have been hit with high property
taxes, record high gasoline prices and a stupendous loss in home equality.
I think inner burbs are gaining in popularity as is the city core.
Even a crystal ball cannot predict enrollment there are too many variables .
The bottom line is that the District 230 powers to be are going to protect
Orland district 135 no matter what happens and that means keeping all
That districts students at Sandburg period .I wrote a long time ago that
Palos has all the trees while Orland has all the people ,and trees don’t vote.
Rock Bobster
10:20 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
"Palos has all the trees while Orland has all the people ,and trees don’t vote."
They do in Chicago!LOL Along with "the deceased", "phantoms", people who've moved out of state and many people sharing the same SSN.
Sorry that I got off topic, but I've been hearing a lot of horror stories regarding the voter fraud that David Orr has been protecting lately, and I couldn't resist.
BTW, Former Board president Dennis Cook was pushing for a long time to break the district into 7 "regions" so that every area and school was guaranteed representation.
Having that sort of system may better protect the interests of the families in them, but the Board members from the 135 and 140 areas have been blocking it.
Out of curiosity, would the readers here prefer that sort of system?
District 230 do the right thing for the students
8:55 pm on Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Why don't we thing about the student’s educational needs first, instead of property values, long bus rides and social issues. District 230’s board’s decision should be based on the student’s ability to receive a quality education regardless which school they attend. Andrew students should not have to suffer with limited choices.
Rock Bobster
12:48 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
..and what makes you think they'll have more "limited" choices? 1800 students is MORE than enough to offer a full range of AP classes...if the students want them. If there was enough interest in having an orchestra there, there would be one.
To date, I haven't heard ONE argument from the board or administration that having more students at Andrew would improve student outcomes. That's very telling.
The Board only claims they want to even out enrollment (for the teachers and administrators). That's what this is all about, NOT improving the quality of education for our students!
aarrnn
9:19 pm on Wednesday, September 19, 2012
District 140 families pay the same taxes as D135, D118, D117 and D146 - those families should be afforded the same educational opportunities at Andrew than students at Stagg and Sandburg should have. Optimum school size, Rocklobster, becomes irrelevant when taxpayers in the same district have less opportunity to programs than their counterparts - that is called inequity.
Rock Bobster
12:43 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
aarn, you obvoiusly don't understnad how school opportunity works by your statement. There quite simply is no guarantee that just because a school has a lot of students that it's students will have more "programs". Often quite the opposite is true.
When my oldest daughter was a senior at Stagg a few years ago, she wanted to take a class in statistics since she was going to be a business major.
Sorry, she was told, but they already had 4 sections of that class filled with 28 students each, the maximum allowed by the teachers union for one teacher.
2500 students, more than enough demand to add another class that students NEEDED more than the "basket weaving" and "culinary arts" classes they offer.
She would've been better off in a smaller school that only offered one section of the class.
Try getting into sports or drama opportunities at a "Big" school. At Sandburg many get turned away, and the distirct doesn't offer "B" team play like the Naperville and other West and North susburban schools do.
I taught at a 750 student school that had one of the best drama teams in the state, and now has one of the best football teams in Catholic League. "Bigger" seldom means "better".
Expecting humongous schools to offer more opportunities simply ins't correct...thinking that it does is called "foolishness"!
Tatiana
6:01 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Has anyone inquired why 230 doesn't offer "B" team opportunities? It seems as though the community should be coming together to provide students with as many safe and productive outlets to interact with one another as possible.
bob busch
6:59 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Dear Rock Bobster
Sorry about your daughter I had a similar situation .
regarding one of my kids at Sandburg.
in my case i would not take no for an answer.
At that time i taught at Simeon another very
successful small school.
But let us all try and stick to the issue
of District 230 option zones.
Rock Bobster
7:17 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Bob, I appreciate your comment, but don't you think that the Board should have a clear reason for this change?
I've read all the district statements, and I can't find a compelling reason based upon the best interests of the students and families to do it.
Parents seem to be most interested in having their students attend the school closest to thier home. They seem to be satisfied with the current arrangement. Why change it?
It seems that on the South end of the district that more students should be attending Andrew, which is closer to their home. If they don't want this, though, I see no reason to change things.
Since NONE of the schools is overcrowded (Stagg and Andrew have capacities for up to 4,000 students and Sandburg over 5,000 according to district calculations) there seems to little compelling argument for doing this as far as student and family interest is concerned.
Based on the 2016 projected emrollment data, Andrew would drop to 1800 students, a good size for a HS, but would need to drop about 20% of administration, staff and faculty. Some would need to be transferred, but that would mean dropping staff at the school to which they were transferred.
That's the real "need" being addressed here. I just wish the board and administration wouold be honest about it.
Gary Steven
7:56 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
I have a unique perspective on this subject. I was a "victim" of school busing in the 70s. They framed the argument differently them, but the effect was the same. I was told I could not go the school near my house, rather I had to ride a bus to a distant school. This effected my ability to make fiends, participate in school activities and get my homework done. Have you ever tried to do homework on a moving school bus? My commute was 1 hour each way. That's two hours a day! If I rode the activity bus it was even longer because it had several routes to cover. Many of us commute for our jobs. We do that to live in this neighborhood. Do we really want to put our kids through this as well?
My daughter will not be effected and it would be easy for me to ignore this issue. Property values though effect all of us.
If this passes I will make it my mission to see every school board member who votes yes and the superintendent ousted!!
Donna Haugh
9:09 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
I live on the south end of Orland, and although we do live a bit closer to Andrew, I prefer my children go to Sandburg. They have attended the Orland schools since Kindergarten and for the most part have been in class with the same kids throughout these past 9 years. Alside from all the other reasons, High school is a big transition and I believe it is easier and less scary when you can be around the familar faces of the people you know. I agree with those of you who live close to Sandburg, if you live within walking distance then you should still have the option of attending Sandburg, however, for those who live further and already attend a Palos or Tinley school, why not let your kids go to school with their classmates. Don't the majority of the kids who graduate for either Palos or Tinley Central go to Stagg or Andrew anyway?
Just sayin
5:27 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
My subdivision is 1/2 mile east of Sandburg, and we don't get a choice, we have to bus our kids to Stagg. It does not make sense!!! It's been that way for years. The school board needs to look at the whole picture, and restructure the entire district. None of our students should be sitting on a bus for a half an hour, when there is a school 5 minutes from home.
Jim Harmening
8:35 am on Friday, September 21, 2012
The Tinley central kids go to Tinley Park High School, Oak Forest High School and Sandburg. The district runs from 183rd on the south to 143 on the north. The Orland kids go five years to Kruse Elementary, by memorial park, in Orland park, they go 3 years to middle school at Central in Tinley.
Justsaying
9:26 am on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Why is 171st street the not the northern boundary for Andrew High School? Those kids should not travel that far to Sandburg. That alone makes me believe D135 gets preferential treatment. Where does the board members reside? Does this effect their children or property values? I also think the option zone is unfair. Give all of D230 the
option or no one.
Just a regular person
12:19 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Having had three children go through district 230, I'll tell you now....it is a done deal!
Concerned Parent
12:55 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Not sure what "that makes me believe D135 gets preferential treatment" means?? Because the kids travel further to get to Sandburg then to Andrew, that's preferential treatment? We moved to Orland Park with the intention of sending our children to the D135 schools as well as to Sandburg, if we wanted our children to attend either of the other schools then we would have bought our home elsewhere. It certainly makes sense that Orland School District 135 students would attend a school within the same town they reside in.
Justsaying
2:54 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
I think this is the same position as the people that are attending Sandburg now. Whether they are in D146 or the option zone (which portions of both are in Orland Park) , they purchased their homes based on Sandburg.
bob busch
3:13 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Not to be a wise guy please look at a map.Sandburg is located in Palos
township.Not only that but someone posted the fact Sandburg is in the
Stagg attendance area,!District 135 is massive that is why Sandburg is so crowded right now .Are we going to add on to it for the 14 or 15th time? It has
over one thousand students more than Stagg and Andrew. Based on that fact
alone it gets more resources than the rest because funding is based on attendance. No doubt this educational situation is being addressed with
a political response.Since almost half of Palos Township is Forest Preserve
the growth potential is limited.There is still lots of vacant land in the 135
district at what point will Sandburg become unmanageable?
Janice Hankosky
1:45 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
The logistics of this matter should require all children living SOUTH of 159th Street, whether it be in Orland or Tinley, attend Andrew. For some idiotic reason years ago, Orland Park felt Sandburg belongs strictly to them.
s a
2:32 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Will Sandburg Students be only from D135 now?
Janice Hankosky
3:08 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Some 25+ years ago, children living in the subdivisions, north of 159th street and south of 153rd street, all in Orland Park, attended Andrew High School. But as I stated before Orland Park felt that only children living in Orland could attend Sandburg and that school belongs to them. It should be noted that 2 districts merged to create Sandburg HS, Orland and PALOS, and not just Orland Park.
Janice Hankosky
5:45 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Maybe Orland Park and Sandburg can form their own district and then they wouldn't have to deal with Tinley or Palos and likewise Tinley and Palos wouldn't have to deal with them.
Gary Steven
6:47 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Having gone to that meeting on Tuesday I get the feeling the decision has been made. The fact that Sandburg sits inside of the Stagg zone does not matter to people only looking at numbers. That's like having the Illinois capital in Iowa. We need a new leadership.
Just sayin
8:08 pm on Thursday, September 20, 2012
Same way decisions are made in 118 too--all about the numbers!! We need to be fiscally responsible, but you need to have common sense too!! Slow down and make the right changes the first time!
Catalina Mom
9:47 pm on Monday, September 24, 2012
Attn CATALINA and GOLFVIEW Residents....If they take SANDBURG From us, all we will have left of "Orland" is our POOL PASS and our LIBRARY CARD! We pay for a ZIP CODE that wants NOTHING to DO With US! Why is this??? WE are BEGGING the MAYOR and the BOARD to include us in our own Community. How is that EVEN up for Debate???
iceman63
8:00 pm on Thursday, September 27, 2012
Can someone please explain the urgency to this decision? Is it budgeting--staffing, is it money for bussing, is it board members trying to preserve the AP programs? AND how can the administration and board predetermine which programs are going to be cut when they do not know accurate numbers? why would you take away ANY class without knowing that students will or won't be taking it? How can they decide to get rid of Band at Andrew if there will be enough students enrolled to keep it? I thought this is about enrollment numbers, not just slashing classes to punish those who are stuck having to stay at Andrew, which by the way, is a GREAT school! Well organized, good administration and solid staff.
I know the district wants to keep kids from one elementary district all-together, however, eventually they will be separated. (In preparing students for college, they aren't all going together to the same college.) But on the flip side, I feel it's silly and not fiscally responsible to move students who are a stone's throw from a school to a bus ride away- that's a waste of bus fuel.
Tatiana
10:29 pm on Thursday, September 27, 2012
I agree with you. As a side note, if schools were assigned based on proximity as a first priority, wouldn't the kids still have the potential be at school with other kids who they grew up with in their neighborhoods?