At the heart of the discussions was the proposal to consolidate schools to ensure equal educational opportunities and increase inclusivity within the district. A significant aspect of the plan involves the potential acquisition of the Good Shepherd School building and its conversion into a 4-5 grade facility, which is projected to result in a net gain of 80 seats. This move is seen as a strategic response to the district’s overcapacity issues and a way to create upgraded spaces for students. The closure of Good Shepherd during the pandemic was highlighted as a catalyst for these ongoing conversations.

The board also addressed the multi-year planning involved, with a successful outcome beginning in September 2027 as the goal. The discussions included the need for concrete information in decision-making and the long-term implications of the proposed changes, such as the impact on class sizes, enrollment, and the condition of older buildings.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to discussing the potential benefits of the consolidation, including better alignment in assessments, more inclusive learning environments, and preparation of fourth and fifth graders for middle school. The social and emotional benefits, such as facilitating friendships, were also emphasized.

The community impact of the proposed referendum was a point of contention. The board members discussed the importance of balancing the needs of the 2300 students and their families with the concerns of the 14,000 residents. They reiterated their commitment to providing information, addressing questions from the community, and engaging in discussions before any decision is made. The potential inclusion of athletic and recreational fields in the plan was discussed, addressing the need for additional space for both school and community activities. The board referenced investments in neighboring districts to support the community use aspect of the proposed athletic complex.

The conversation also considered the complexities of renovating existing buildings, such as Garfield and Sharp, in terms of age, square footage, and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The board was tasked with comparing different school buildings and addressing disparities in improvements among the schools that will remain open.

Community members raised concerns about the potential sale of Garfield and the allocation of funds from that sale, with questions about the distribution of funds to address issues at other facilities. The board clarified that current estimates are based on architectural analysis and available on the district’s website, though the final costs would be determined after the referendum.

Questions were also raised about the impact of the proposed changes on existing classes and programs, with concerns about displacements, such as those affecting third-grade classes. The board assured that discussions with special educators and the child study team would be held to plan effectively for changes if the referendum is approved.

The necessity of decommissioning certain school buildings was explained as a means to meet the requirements for acquiring Good Shepherd and to address the need for a certain number of seats. The board stressed that the decision to decommission schools was driven by the goal of providing better spaces for students and acknowledged the academic benefits of an inclusive model, despite associated costs and the need to build internal capacity.

The meeting also served as a reminder about an upcoming opportunity for community engagement on April 16th and the availability of a recorded Q&A session for those interested. Throughout the discussions, there were instances of tension and debate, particularly around the decision-making process, the impact on the community, and the budget constraints.

The board acknowledged the current funding formula’s limitations and the need for advocacy for a new funding formula. They clarified that the plan does not involve adding more staff at the current time, and decisions about additional resources, such as art teachers, cannot be made until later.