Share
About 500 students, parents and teachers packed Myers Park High's cafeteria Tuesday, united mainly by frustration with Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools' proposals to reassign International Baccalaureate magnet students.
The school board is considering moving some or all of Myers Park's 550 IB magnet students to East Meck next year. The proposal is designed to relieve crowding at Myers Park, which has 2,960 students this year, and bolster enrollment at East, which will drop to about half that size when a new high school opens in 2010.
But many speakers said those moves would hurt Myers Park while doing little for East.
"We don't understand why the IB program is being dismantled," said Myers Park parent Paul Halter. "Everyone thinks, and I agree, this is the crown jewel of the CMS system."
East Meck parent Tim Ledgerwood urged officials to go back to redrawing boundaries to enlarge East, saying the magnet proposals are a diversion.
"It's a stupid plan. The board's not going to vote for it," he said. "Kill the crown jewel? Who's going to vote for that? Give us another option."
The list of options introduced in September included a proposal to move the Cotswold Elementary zone from Myers Park to East. But a majority of board members pulled the plug on that plan before approving a study of the magnet options.
Myers Park IB backers turned out in force, wearing the school color, green. IB students got credit toward required community service hours for attending. A smaller group of East parents and teachers joined them. The school cafeteria, originally set up with 360 seats, overflowed even after staff brought in extra tables and opened a cafeteria addition.
The meeting continued months of intense debate over boundaries, which began last spring with the quest to draw attendance lines for a new high school opening in Mint Hill in 2010.
The board's August decision will reduce enrollment at Independence, Butler and East Meck, all of which are considered too crowded now. Many East backers argued the enrollment cut goes too far at East, which would lose about 600 of this year's 2,100 students.
Several teachers said a dedicated faculty, already battered by this year's layoffs, will now face the loss of an estimated 37 teachers next year.
Myers Park families say they were ambushed by the August decision to look at removing students, after months of discussions that did not involve Myers Park.
Speakers from both groups urged officials to consider better options for strengthening East, from adding new magnets there to expanding its boundaries to improving middle schools that feed into it. A common theme: The current scramble to switch students isn't helpful.
"Student realignment is the most disruptive, divisive solution," said Myers Park parent Niki Simmons.
Some East Meck backers stayed home, citing reports in Tuesday's Observer that school board member Tom Tate had backed away from reassigning magnet students.
Tate, who represents the East Meck district and made the August motion to consider moving students from Myers Park to East, said Monday he doesn't think changing the magnet programs would help either school. Enrollment in IB magnets is in flux because of stricter requirements, and many Myers Park IB families say they wouldn't move to new IB schools.
Tate says he still hopes to redraw boundaries to move more students to East Meck.
Linda Peak, one of the organizers of a push to boost enrollment to keep East's faculty and academic programs intact, said her group decided to skip Tuesday's forum.
"(W)e, the East Mecklenburg Action Community, are not interested in participating in a community forum when decisions have been predetermined and our public input is of no consequence. We will not be party to such disrespect," she e-mailed.
In September, CMS administrators also introduced plans to relieve crowding at Eastover Elementary. Another community meeting on those options will be 6:30 to 8:30 Thursday at Myers Park High, 2400 Colony Road. The board is scheduled to discuss all the proposals, along with possible new ones generated after the meetings, on Oct. 27. A vote is scheduled Nov. 10.
