This document proposes boundary changes between several elementary schools to address capacity issues. It presents a three step plan ("Plan 0") to: 1) Create attendance zones for a new elementary school to relieve overcrowding at Clayton ES, 2) Provide relief for Oak Hill ES and Mills ES by reassigning students to Southwest ES, Patton ES, and Kiker ES, and 3) Increase enrollment at under capacity schools Sunset Valley ES and Boone ES. The proposal is analyzed against criteria of capacity, family impact, feeder patterns, and stability. It aims to keep school populations within 75-115% of capacity through 2013 while minimizing student reassignments.

1. Proposed Elementary SchoolBoundary ChangesPresentation of Plan 0 Southwest Elementary SchoolFacility Use and Boundary Task Force November 3, 2009

2. Introduction Starting point for FUBTF discussion Proposal for meeting the four criteria for boundary changes Capacity Family Impact Feeder Pattern Stability Initiate discussion on key issues: Current and projected population changes Access and proximity to school Neighborhood issues and concerns Identify options for FUBTF decisions 2

3. Assumption Student population projections are from the 2009 demographic report 3

4. Definitions Population: The number of students who reside in a school’s attendance zone Membership: The number of students who attend a school. Permanent Capacity: The capacity of a school base on the number of permanent classroom and the size of the core facilities: gym, library, and cafeteria. Does not include portables. Functional Capacity: The capacity of a school based on the number of permanent and portable classrooms but not including classes used for district-wide uses and Special Education classes and the size of the core facilities. 4

5. Abbreviations PP: Projected Population PC: Permanent Capacity 5

6. FUBTF Boundary Criteria Capacity: Achieve capacity targets that ensure efficient operation of facilities Family Impact: Affect the fewest students possible Feeder pattern: Attend to the alignment of feeder patterns, as reasonable, and balanced against other criteria Stability: Prevent multiple reassignment of students among schools by developing stable, long-term assignment plans 6

7. Process At the last FUBTF meeting, the FUBTF decided to start the process by creating the attendance zone for the new SWES The first step will focus on relieving Clayton ES The presentation of Plan 0 will be provided in three steps. Create the attendance zone for the new SWES Provide relief for over-crowded schools Increase student population at under-capacity schools 7

8. Step One Create Attendance Zone for new Southwest Elementary School 8

9. 2010 PP: 1,262 (143% PC) 2013 PP: 1,553 (176% PC) 9

10. Clayton 10

11. Clayton Planning Areas: 193E, 195P, 195R, 195A 2010 PP: 781 (89% PC) 2013 PP: 895 (102% PC) ) 11

12. SWES Planning Areas: 195C, 195D, PA between US Hwy 290 and FM 1826 2010 PP: 481 (68% PC) 2013 PP: 658 (93% PC) 12

13. SWES Clayton 2010 PP: 481 (68% PC) 2013 PP: 658 (93% PC) 2010 PP: 781 (89% PC) 2013 PP: 895 (102% PC) ) 13

14. Step Two Provide Relief for Over-Crowded Schools: Oak Hill and Mills Elementary Schools 14

15. Relief for Oak Hill ES Option1: Oak Hill ES and SWES Option 2: Oak Hill ES and Patton ES Option 3: Oak Hill ES and Sunset Valley ES

16. Relief for Oak Hill ES Option1: Oak Hill ES and SWES Option 2: Oak Hill ES and Patton ES Option 3: Oak Hill ES and Sunset Valley ES

17. Oak Hill 2010 PP: 1,099 (128% PC) 2013 PP: 1,204 (140% PC) 17

18. Oak Hill Access to US Hwy 290 from Planning Areas: 149A, 149B, 149D 2009 PP: 21 2013 PP: 32 18

19. Oak Hill Access to US Hwy 290 from Planning Areas: 149C, and 149E 2009 PP: 37 2013 PP: 37 19

20. Oak Hill Planning Areas 149F and 149G have no current or projected students For all Seven planning areas: 2009 PP: 58 2013 PP: 69 20

22. The SWES would open with 542 students (77% of PC) and increase to 727 students by 2013 (103% of PC)21

23. Relief for Oak Hill ES Option1: Oak Hill ES and SWES Option 2: Oak Hill ES and Patton ES Option 3: Oak Hill ES and Sunset Valley ES

24. Oak Hill Access to US Hwy 290 from Planning Areas: 249B, 249E, 249A, 249D 23

25. Oak Hill Access to US Hwy 290 from Planning Areas: 249B, 249E, 249A, 249D 2009 Projected Students: 184 2013 Projected Students: 224 24

27. For 2010, Patton population would increase from 644 students (70% PC) to 836 (90%); but decrease slightly to 808 (87%) by 2013.25

28. Relief for Oak Hill ES Option1: Oak Hill ES and SWES Option 2: Oak Hill ES and Patton ES Option 3: Oak Hill ES and Sunset Valley ES

29. Oak Hill Access to US Hwy 290 or Mopac from Planning Areas: 49O, 49M 27

30. Oak Hill Access to US Hwy 290 from Planning Areas: 49O, 49M 2009 Projected Students: 27 2013 Projected Students: 43 28

32. For the 2010 school year, Sunset Valley ES would have 567 students (73% of PC) and increase to 628 by 2013 (81% of PC).29

33. SWES Oak Hill 2010 PP: 542 (77% PC) 2013 PP: 727 (103% PC) 2010 PP: 816 (95% PC) 2013 PP: 868 (101% PC) 30

34. Sunset Valley Patton 2010 PP: 567 (73% PC) 2013 PP: 628 (81% PC) 2010 PP: 836 (90% PC) 2013 PP: 808 (101% PC) 31

35. Relief for Mills ES Mills ES and Kiker ES

37. 2013 population: 666 (82% PC)33

39. The southern portion of adjacent planning area 96H2 only has access of Beckett and does not connect to adjacent neighborhoods.

40. 2009 PP: 9634

41. Mills 35

42. Mills Three contiguous planning areas would be included: 96E, 96G, 96H1 96E has five students and planning areas 96G and 96H1 have no students. 36

43. Existing Mills ES and Kiker ES boundaries 37

45. 2013 PP: 885 (106%)

46. 2010 PP: 762 (94%)

47. 2013 PP: 771 (95%)38

48. Step Three Increase Student Population of Under – Capacity Schools: Sunset Valley and Boone Elementary Schools 39

50. 2013 population: 472 (56%)40

51. Boone Access to William Cannon Blvd and Brodie Lane :173B and 173A 2009 Projected Students: 27 2013 Projected Students: 43 41

52. Boone Access to William Cannon Blvd and BrodieLane :173B and 173A 2010 Projected Students: 27 2013 Projected Students: 41 42

54. 2013 PP: 513 (61%)

55. 2010 PP: 541 (70%)

56. 2013 PP: 587 (76%)43

57. Overview 44

58. Existing Boundaries 45

59. 46

60. Criteria Capacity: Achieve capacity targets that ensure efficient operation of facilities Family Impact: Affect the fewest students possible Feeder pattern: Attend to the alignment of feeder patterns, as reasonable, and balanced against other criteria Stability: Prevent multiple reassignment of students among schools by developing stable, long-term assignment plans 47

61. Criteria 1: Capacity 48

62. 2010-11 School Year: Existing vs. Plan 0 Boundaries 49

63. 2013-14 School Year: Existing vs. Plan 0 Boundaries 50

64. Criteria 1: Capacity Seven of eight schools remain within 75% to 115% of permanent capacity by the 2013-14 school year The most crowded school is Mills ES is at 106% but its population begins to slowly decrease 51

65. Criteria 2: Family ImpactCriteria 4: Stability Changes between Sunset Valley ES and Boone ES 52

66. Criteria 3: Feeder Pattern Oak Hill to SWES Oak Hill to Sunset Valley ES 53

67. Questions/Comments 54