Planning for the Future - 2021/2022 Boundary Discussion May 17, 2021 - Indian Prairie School District 204
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Planning for the Future
2021/2022 Boundary Discussion
May 17, 2021
Discussion Points
Introduction (Part One)
⚫ Process Details
⚫ RSP
⚫ Presentation Goals
⚫ Poll Everywhere
Process Overview (Part Two)
⚫ Process Details
⚫ Roles
⚫ Academics, Culture, Economics (ACE)
Guiding Principles and Boundary Criteria (Part Three)
⚫ Review of Guiding Principles
⚫ Review of Boundary Criteria
⚫ Survey Results
⚫ Confirmation of Guiding Principles
⚫ Confirmation of Boundary Criteria
Moving Forward
⚫ Next Steps
2
Part One
Introductions
3
Who is RSP
⚫ Founded in 2003
⚫ Professional educational planning firm
⚫ Expertise in multiple disciplines
⚫ Over 20 Years of planning experience
⚫ Over 80 years of education experience
Over 130 clients in Arkansas, Colorado,
⚫ Over 20 years of GIS experience Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota,
Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota,
⚫ Projection accuracy of 97% or greater Oklahoma, and Wisconsin
Illinois Projects in Last Year: RSP Leadership:
Robert Schwarz, AICP, CEFP
SD 308 Unit Community Unit School District • Military, County, City, and School District Planner
• Enrollment Analysis • Kansas University - Master of Urban Planning (MUP)
• American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP)
CCSD #15 • Certified Educational Facility Planner (CEFP)
• Enrollment Analysis Stared company with the desire and commitment to assist school
• Facilitation of Attendance Area Changes (By Strands) districts in long range planning
Lake Zurich District #95
• Enrollment Analysis Our Partners:
• Facilitation of Attendance Area Changes
Rockford Public Schools
• Enrollment Analysis
• Building Utilization
• Attendance Area Changes (By Strands)
Presentation Goals
1. Provide information that will help guide future Boundary Committee discussions
for the Elementary Attendance area realignment:
▪ Boundary Process
▪ Academic / Culture / Economics (ACE)
▪ Guiding Principles
▪ Boundary Criteria
▪ Next Steps
2. Establish Board prioritized Guiding Principles and Boundary Criteria
3. Provide a transparent dialogue between RSP, Administration, School Board, and
Boundary Committee to facilitate patron buy-in of proposed changes and
justifications to why adjustments to current boundary lines are necessary.
5
Poll Everywhere Directions
RSP will use Poll Everywhere polling platform to ask questions and get feedback
from the Committee throughout the process:
RSP will use Poll Everywhere polling platform to ask questions and get feedback from the Boundary Team to better understand what you may be thinking about various
issues throughout the process:
⚫ Keeping your mind engaged
⚫ Get immediate feedback
⚫ Answers will help with future discussions
⚫ Use cell phone text messages to participate
⚫ Responses are anonymous
6
Part Two
Process Discussion
7
Process Details
4 School Board Meetings
● April 12, 2021
● May 17, 2021
● December 2021
● January 2022
8 Boundary Committee Meetings
2 Public Forums
Begins: Spring 2021
Completed: Winter 2022
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 8
Defined Process Roles
Provide the framework of the process, community values, Guiding Principles,
prioritized boundary criteria, receive committee recommendation, listen to
School Board community input, and approve attendance areas for the 2022/23 school year.
Provide guidance over the process, attend the meetings and public forums, be a
resource in answering questions related to school district related topics,
Administration communicate the educational vision, and provide ongoing progress updates to the
school community through a targeted communication plan.
Facilitator (Board, Boundary Committee, and Public Forums). Utilize GIS data,
knowledge gained from city jurisdictions and others to generate options/scenarios
RSP based on the Board Guiding Principles, Prioritized Boundary Criteria, and
committee and community public feedback.
Examine scenarios presented and evaluate based on the Board Guiding Principles
Boundary and Prioritized Boundary Criteria so a recommendation can be provided to the
Committee Board of Education. Focus is not on knowing where students reside, but rather the
Guiding Principles and Prioritized Boundary Criteria.
Review the scenarios/options and provide constructive feedback so the Boundary
Committee and/or Board can consider how their perspective can be integrated
Community into the boundary plan the Board will vote on for implementation in the 2022/23
school year.
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 9
Academics, Culture, Economics (ACE)
Digging Deeper:
⚫ Relationship between all three
pillars and the impact they have
on each other
⚫ It is a framework that starts the
larger boundary discussion
21st Century Learning Athletics Repurpose of Schools ⚫ Not focused on a physical
College & Career Activities Remodeling/ Additions building or space
Ready Clubs New Construction
Relevant & Rigorous Organizations Bond Referendums ⚫ Provides balance and prevents
Class Size Student Engagement Community Support tunnel vision
Enrollment/Capacity Parent Involvement Ability/Desire to Afford ⚫ Keeps everyone focused on
Traditions/Pride what is important: (Students,
Safety Staff, Families, and Community)
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 10Part Three
Guiding Principles and Boundary Criteria
11Boundary Guiding Principles 2021
The following are Proposed Guiding Principles to consider for the
Boundary Process:
⚫ The Board will consider this boundary work as part of district wide long-range planning
⚫ The future boundary should provide even better educational opportunities at each school to
ensure an equitable student experience at each school
⚫ Neighborhoods are influential in how attendance areas are created and accepted by the
community
o Accessibility for families is essential (volunteering and attending school function are easier when the school is near)
⚫ Future boundaries can anticipate future change of the neighborhood
o Walkability may not be possible currently – some schools may start with small enrollment in anticipation of growth
⚫ The focus of the Boundary Process is at all grade levels (Elementary, Middle & High)
⚫ The boundary proposed should continue to effectively utilize all the available District resources
⚫ Boundary lines that follow natural/manmade boundaries are desired in how attendance areas
are created
⚫ Grandfathering/Transfers/Student Options will be Administration recommendations to the
Board according to Board policy
*Example: Can make changes or additions
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 12Boundary Criteria Options 2021
The following are always to be considered:
⚫ Exceptional education must take place at each facility in every option
⚫ The goal is to focus on Board of Education goals and priorities, and provide for the
educational need of each student
Boundary Criteria Example (Alphabetized):
1. Contiguous Attendance Areas
2. Demographic Considerations
3. Duration of Boundaries
4. Feeder System Considerations
5. Fiscal Consideration - Capital
6. Fiscal Consideration - Operational
7. Neighborhoods Intact *Criteria examples on the
following slides. May not
8. Projected Enrollment/Building Utilization show current boundaries or
enrollment numbers.
9. Students Impacted by Boundary Change
10. Transportation Considerations
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 13Contiguous Attendance Areas
Contiguous Non Contiguous Focus:
To create
boundaries that
visually make
sense.
Considerations:
Contiguous Attendance
Areas
⚫ Contiguous Map
illustrates the
attendance areas being
compact
⚫ Non-Contiguous Map
illustrates there is an
island with the green
and pink attendance
area
⚫ Contiguous
attendance areas are
typically more compact
⚫ All areas of the
district should be
assigned to an
ES/MS/HS attendance
area
Goal is to have compact attendance areas.
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 14Demographic
Considerations
Naperville
Focus: Indian Prairie
School District
Community Unit SD 308 City of City of State o
School District Oswego Aurora Naperville Illinoi
204
203
Ensure student academic, social, and Unemployment Rate
Average Household Size
9.3%
2.86
9.8%
2.64
9.5%
3.07
11.8%
3.14
9.5%
2.77
11.8%
2.56
mental health need are met at each Median Age 35.7 40.6 34.7 32.3 39.1 38.2
Total Population 136,848 84,809 82,934 203,191 146,195 12,862,98
school for each specific academic Median Household Income $117,498 $116,247 $95,147 $72,749 $125,188 $65,003
Total Housing Units 49,870 33,029 28,123 69,128 54,596 5,400,68
program. Owner Occupied Housing Units 34,724 22,529 23,557 43,313 38,678 3,213,43
Renter Occupied Housing Units 12,942 8,629 3,392 20,750 13,176 1,687,13
Vacancy Rate 4.4% 5.7% 4.2% 7.3% 5.0% 9.3%
Considerations: Demographics
Naperville
Indian Prairie
Community Unit SD 308 City of City of State o
• Educational Programming Ethnicity School District
School District Oswego Aurora Naperville Illinoi
204
203
• Census data White 56.7% 70.6% 64.0% 35.6% 67.0% 60.2%
Black
• Household salary average American Indian/Alaskan
8.3%
0.1%
4.4%
0.1%
8.0%
0.1%
10.1%
0.1%
5.1%
0.1%
13.9%
0.1%
Asian 22.3% 15.8% 6.5% 8.0% 18.8% 5.9%
• Type of development Pacific Islander 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other Race 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1%
• Home values Two or More Races 2.8% 2.3% 2.2% 1.9% 2.5% 1.8%
Hispanic 9.6% 6.8% 19.1% 44.1% 6.4% 17.9%
• Ethnicity Source; U.S. Census, Esri BAO
• Socio-Economic Indicators
Goal is to provide a similar student experience at
each school regardless of the variables utilized.
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 15Duration of Boundaries
Focus:
Ensure boundary adjustments are
anticipating possible changes in the
future. 2020/21 Boundaries
Considerations: Duration
⚫ This factor addresses the ability addresses the
ability of an attendance area to accommodate
the anticipated enrollment for a projected
period
⚫ Where possible, attendance areas should be
stabilized to limit the number of boundary
changes experienced by students
⚫ In established areas with little or no 2016/17 Boundaries
demographic change projected, boundaries
should be planned to last for a significant
period of time
Goal is to have attendance areas remain
the same for as long as possible.
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 16Feeder System Considerations
Complete Feeder Incomplete Feeder
Attendance area is split to
create islands that result in
noncontiguous areas.
When a school at one level
has students split to more
than one school at the next
level.
Attendance area is not split
creating compact contiguous
attendance areas.
When a school at one level
has all students at that
school attend one school at
the next level.
Focus: Considerations: Feeder System
⚫ Where possible, create boundaries between elementary,
Ensure as many schools have students move middle and high schools to have as many schools as
from one grade level to maximize student possible as each level advance students as one group to the
connectivity with their peers. next educational level.
⚫ Also, avoid small numbers of students being moved from a
large group when transitioning from elementary to middle
school to high school.
Goal is to have each elementary feed into the same middle school and into a high school
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 17Fiscal Consideration-Capital
Focus:
Ensure boundary changes minimize the need
and/or effectively eliminates the need for
additional construction projects.
Considerations: Capital
⚫ The impact on capital costs should be a consideration.
This factor addresses: Metea Valley High School
◦ New facility construction
◦ Building additions and/or remodeling
◦ Mobile classrooms/Demountable wall relocations
◦ Other capital cost
Brookdale Elementary School
Goal is for no additional expenses on brick and mortar projects
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 18Fiscal Consideration-Operational
Focus:
Ensure boundary changes minimize the need
and/or effectively eliminates the need for
additional construction projects.
Considerations: Operational
Where possible, boundaries should be planned to maximize
district resources in a fiscally responsible manner and take
advantage of economies of scale. Photo: IPSD 204
⚫ This factor addresses:
◦ Staffing requirements
◦ Educational program needs
◦ Other operational cost
Photo: IPSD 204
Goal is for no additional expenses on staffing for each school
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 19Neighborhood Intact
Focus:
Ensure subdivisions are maintained in
a school’s attendance area. Utilizes
natural divisions between
neighborhoods as attendance line.
Considerations: Neighborhood Intact
⚫ Where possible, boundaries should be
structured to maintain a neighborhood within
one school’s attendance area.
⚫ Neighborhoods should not be split between
two schools
⚫ A neighborhood is defined as the smallest
division of a planning area that can be
subdivided by a natural line of demarcation,
such as a stream or major traffic way
⚫ There should be logical limits to define a
neighborhood
Goal is to have each planning area
(subdivision) attend one school –
not split between schools
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 20Projected Enrollment/Building Utilization
School Capacity Student Past School Enrollment Future Enrollment Future Capacity
Current Location 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26
Prairie Children Preschool Reside/Attend 690 685 463
South of 34 Hwy 644 Reside 690 685 463 686 653 703 675 660 106.5% 101.4% 109.2% 104.8% 102.5%
Grades PK Attend 690 685 463 686 653 703 675 660 106.5% 101.4% 109.2% 104.8% 102.5%
Brookdale Elementary Reside/Attend 468 480 467
North of 34 Hwy 585 Reside 605 520 478 503 496 512 537 569 86.0% 84.8% 87.5% 91.8% 97.3%
Grades K-5 Attend 491 483 474 503 481 497 522 554 86.0% 82.2% 85.0% 89.2% 94.7%
Brooks Elementary Reside/Attend 583 604 543
North of 34 Hwy 765 Reside 671 674 579 554 542 510 509 518 72.4% 70.8% 66.7% 66.5% 67.7%
Grades K-5 Attend 642 604 545 516 496 464 463 472 67.5% 64.8% 60.7% 60.5% 61.7%
Builta Elementary Reside/Attend 302 296 288
South of 34 Hwy 765 Reside 311 299 291 279 279 272 261 266 36.5% 36.5% 35.6% 34.1% 34.8%
Grades K-5 Attend 338 318 316 302 302 295 284 289 39.5% 39.5% 38.6% 37.1% 37.8%
Clow Elementary Reside/Attend 323 333 341
South of 34 Hwy 484 Reside 343 335 346 338 330 319 319 316 69.8% 68.2% 65.9% 65.9% 65.3%
Grades K-5 Attend 365 358 365 356 350 339 339 336 73.6% 72.4% 70.1% 70.1% 69.5%
Cowlishaw Elementary Reside/Attend 624 646 650
South of 34 Hwy 689 Reside 744 660 670 682 704 705 707 702 99.0% 102.2% 102.3% 102.6% 101.9%
Grades K-5 Attend 696 672 655 670 698 699 701 696 97.2% 101.3% 101.5% 101.7% 101.0%
Fry Elementary Reside/Attend 497 546 588
South of 34 Hwy 855 Reside 521 555 771 799 789 771 782 779 93.5% 92.3% 90.2% 91.5% 91.1%
Grades K-5 Attend 617 598 592 626 684 666 677 674 73.2% 80.0% 77.9% 79.2% 78.8%
Georgetown Elementary Reside/Attend 465 489 470
South of 34 Hwy 630 Reside 519 508 487 474 475 479 484 483 75.2% 75.4% 76.0% 76.8% 76.7%
Grades K-5 Attend 489 489 476 464 461 465 470 469 73.7% 73.2% 73.9% 74.7% 74.5%
ELEMENTARY TOTAL
15,138 Reside 11,705 11,482 10,911 11,055 10,982 11,016 11,024 11,131 73.0% 72.5% 72.8% 72.8% 73.5%
Grades K-5 Attend 11,705 11,482 10,911 11,055 10,982 11,016 11,024 11,131 73.0% 72.5% 72.8% 72.8% 73.5%
Source: RSP & Associates, LLC - February 2021
CAPACITY INFORMATION
Focus:
Note 1: Student Projections are based on the residence of the student (Does not Include Open Enroll out of district) Considerations: Projected Enrollment & Building
Below 75% of Current Capacity Utilization
Note 2: School Choice Options between Facilities are depicted in the Projections (ESL, SPED, Other) Above 95% of Current Capacity
Ensure enrollment at each school is within an efficient building
Note 3: PreKindergarten students included in the enrollment projections ⚫ This factor considers building utilization, student enrollment, staffing
Note 4: Capacity of each facility provided by IPSD 204 Schools and does not include mobiles at any of the facilities needs and the educational program(s).
FEEDER INFORMATION
capacity for educational programming in that school.
Note 5: Reside are students that within that attendance area
⚫ Metea Valley HS
Where possible, attendance boundaries should be created to anticipate
Note 6: Attend are students who attended that school Neuqua Valley HS
Note 7: Reside/Attend are students who reside in the attendance area and attend that school the projected enrollment and theWaubonsie
program/current
Valley HS capacity of the
Note 8: Projections are utilizing the 2020/21 BOE approved ES, MS, and HS attendance areas building Metea Valley HS & Waubonsie Valley HS
Note 9: North or South of 34 Hwy based on physical location of school being North or South of 34 Hwy Neuqua Valley HS & Waubonsie Valley HS
⚫ Efficient building utilization should attempt to maximize student
Metea Valley HS, Neuqua Valley HS & Waubonsie Valley HS
population without exceeding capacity long-term.
Goal is to have a balanced, logical enrollment that works within the confines of the
assigned school capacity
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 21Students Impacted by Boundary Change (SIBC)
Numbers in the table are
School K 1 2 3 4 5 Total examples to
demonstrate SIBC; not
part of a proposed
Brookdale 7 6 10 12 11 12 58 boundary change
Proposed boundary
Brooks 22 24 26 21 28 26 147 change would result in a
SIBC at Elementary,
Builta 5 8 7 6 10 8 44 Middle and High School
levels
Focus:
Minimize the disruptions and transitions for students
Considerations: Students Impacted by Boundary Change (SIBC)
⚫ SIBC determines the number of students that will be impacted by a boundary change
⚫ Where possible, minimize the number of existing students impacted by boundary change
⚫ Consideration should be given the number of students affected by a potential boundary change, specifically how many
students from each school could be affected
Goal is to minimize how many students are impacted by the new attendance areas
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 22Transportation
Consideration
Focus:
Ensure transportation systems are
considered, including appropriate
bus routes, time students spend
on a bus, and logistics
Considerations: Transportation
⚫ Road Classifications are the first consideration
in transportation planning.
⚫ Proximity to school is an indicator of travel
time, need to account for actual travel times
(speed limit, stops, etc.)
⚫ While students may not necessarily attend the
closet school; distance, transportation time,
and routing should be considered, and
minimized where possible, in formulating
attendance boundaries
Goal is to have attendance areas that
do not require additional bussing
expenses and/or result in
unreasonable time for a student on a
bus.
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved *Visual only: Does not reflect a proposed boundary option. 23Survey Results
In advance of this meeting, the Board was provided a survey intended to obtain
preliminary feedback to the Guiding Principles and Boundary Criteria
• RSP Partner platform MetroQuest
• 9 participants
• Results provide launching point for discussion of Guiding Principles and Boundary
Criteria
• Establishing agreed upon Guiding Principles and prioritized Boundary Criteria
creates a framework for the committee to use as they develop potential boundary
options
Survey Powered By:
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 24Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 1
Boundary Criteria Part 1: Trade-offs
• These five criteria provide a choice or trade-off
• Participants selected their preference along a scale
• (Prefer – neutral - Do Not Prefer)
1. Contiguous Attendance Areas
2. Feeder System
3. Neighborhoods Intact
4. Fiscal Consideration – Capital
5. Fiscal Consideration - Operational
Note: These five criteria are not more or less important that
the others, just provide more of a structured choice between
two concepts
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 25Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 1
SURVEY INTERPRETATION:
Contiguous Attendance Areas
• Evenly decided
• Current system is noncontiguous
Feeder System
• More support for complete system
Neighborhoods Intact
• Support for keeping
neighborhoods together
Fiscal Consideration – Capital
• No new schools/additions
Fiscal Consideration – Operational
• Leans toward no new spending for
operations
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 26Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 2
Boundary Criteria Part 2: Preference Rating
• These five criteria allow for a rating of elements in each concept
• Participants rated their preference along a starred scale
• (5 stars - agreement, 1 star - no agreement)
1. Demographic Consideration
2. Duration of Boundaries
3. Projected Enrollment/Building Utilization
4. Students Impacted by Boundary Change
5. Transportation Considerations
Note: These five criteria are not more or less important that
the others, just require more description of variables in each
concept
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 27Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 2
Demographic Considerations Duration of Boundaries
• Most support for using socio-economic factors • More support for boundaries to last beyond ten
and housing type years
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 28Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 2
Projected Enrollment/Utilization Students Impacted by Boundary Change
• Results show support for all factors • Support for reasonable limits and consideration
• Most support for consideration of student of students in transitional grades (5th, 8th, 12th)
experience
• Staffing considerations received least support
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 29Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 2
Transportation Considerations
• Most support for limiting students time on the
bus
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 30Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 3
Boundary Criteria Part 2: Criteria Rating
• Ten Boundary Criteria examined in Part 1 and Part 2
• Participants rated their top three Boundary Criteria
1. Contiguous Attendance Areas
2. Demographic Considerations
3. Duration of Boundaries
4. Feeder System Considerations
5. Project Enrollment/Building Utilization
6. Students Impacted by Boundary Change
7. Transportation Consideration
8. Fiscal Consideration – Capital
9. Fiscal Consideration – Operational
10. Neighborhoods Intact
Note: All ten criteria are important; prioritizing provides a
framework for the boundary discussion
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 31Survey Results: Boundary Criteria Part 3
Boundary Criteria Ranking
• Participants asked to select their
top three
#1 • Highest Rank to Demographic
Considerations
• Four-way Tie: Duration of
Boundaries, Projected
#2 #2 #2 #2 Enrollment/Utilization,
Neighborhoods Intact, Fiscal
#3 Considerations – Capital
• Contiguous Attendance areas,
SIBC, Transportation received no
#4
rankings
• Note: The closer the criteria is to
1 means the higher the
participants rated that item,
more likely their first prioritized
criteria
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 32Survey Results: Guiding Principles
Guiding Principles: Selection
• Participants indicated which should be
considered
1. Process part of Long-Range District Planning
2. Future boundaries should improve educational
opportunities at each school
3. Attendance areas influence neighborhoods and
community
4. Boundaries should anticipate future change
5. Focus of process is at all grade levels
6. Proposed boundaries will utilize available district
resources
7. Boundary lines should follow natural/manmade lines
8. Grandfathering/transfers/options determined by district
Note: All the Guiding Principles are important and valuable to
provide needed guidance to the boundary discussion
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 33Survey Results: Guiding Principles
#3
#2
#1
Guiding Principles:
• Guiding Principles are all valuable, however • Top Votes:
some rise to the top 1. Anticipate Future change
• Consideration for all during the boundary 2. Improve educational opportunities at each school
discussion 3. Part of long-range district planning
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 34Discussion and Questions Discussion: • Guiding Principles • Boundary Criteria Next Step: • Vote to agree on Guiding Principles • Vote to Prioritize Boundary Criteria © 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 35
Activity: Board Creates the Framework
Purpose of Activity:
⚫ Confirm Guiding Principles
⚫ Prioritize Boundary Criteria
Materials for Discussion:
⚫ Poll Everywhere
⚫ Guiding Principles
⚫ Boundary Criteria Examples
Directions:
⚫ Answer the questions using the polling platform
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 36Part Four
Moving Forward
37Next Steps
Boundary Process:
First & Second Boundary Meeting; July 7th and July 21st
⚫ Boundary Committee receives charge, process, and enrollment report
⚫ Confirms Guiding Principles and prioritized Boundary Criteria
Public Input; November 2021
⚫ Community provides feedback
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 38Notes
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
© 2021 by RSP & Associates, LLC, All Rights Reserved 39You can also read
