September 30 Consolidation Conversation Reflections:

Dear Families,

On September 30, we held a parent meeting that provided us with an opportunity to hear perspectives and better understand concerns from a family point of view. Since that time, we have met with individual parents to answer more specific questions.  One misconception that became clear during that meeting and at the individual meetings was the belief that the Board would vote on consolidation in November. I want to clarify the timeline and where we are in this process.

During our District strategic planning meetings last fall, we discussed potential strategies to address our growing financial challenges, as District expenditures were exceeding revenues. One of the options identified was the possible consolidation of schools. After reviewing several cost-saving strategies, we determined that consolidation was an option that warranted further exploration.

We intentionally created a period of exploration so that we could gather information, hear from a variety of stakeholders, consider different perspectives, and better understand both the potential benefits and challenges. Throughout this process, I have stressed that a decision had not already been made. Our goal has always been to take the time necessary to make a thoughtful, informed decision that considers not only our financial responsibilities, but also the educational, social, emotional, and operational needs of our students and staff.

At the November Board meeting, we plan to share whether we believe consolidation remains the best option to pursue and, if so, present a preliminary framework for what it would look like. There will not be a Board vote on consolidation at the November meeting. Instead, November would mark the beginning of a much more detailed planning process. The goal would be to develop a complete proposal for presentation to the Board and public in December or January, followed by a minimum 60-day public comment period and a potential Board vote in March or April.

At our parent meeting, families raised thoughtful and legitimate questions. Many centered on younger students being in buildings or on buses with older students and how we would ensure that our youngest learners feel safe and appropriately separated when necessary. Those concerns matter, and any plan we move forward with must address them.

Transportation was another significant concern. Families asked whether we would have adequate bus capacity, whether enough drivers would be available, and how younger and older students would be managed during transportation.

We also heard considerable concern about separating seventh- and eighth-grade students between two buildings. Parents questioned how that would affect athletics, particularly when students in those grade levels often participate on the same teams and use the same facilities. They also raised practical questions about daily transportation between buildings, pep rallies, Homecoming, Winter Carnival, and other experiences that help create a sense of belonging and school community.

There were also many questions about moving fourth and fifth grades to Fretz Middle School. Families asked about playground space, separation from older students, lockers, lunch capacity, arrival and dismissal, and parent pick-up. We have already begun thinking through potential solutions to many of these concerns. For example, lockers could be modified or replaced to better accommodate younger students, and an additional serving line and eating space could help address lunch capacity. A playground would likely not be available during the first year, but could be part of a subsequent phase.

We also heard concerns regarding arrival and dismissal times. Maintaining common dismissal times for the high school and Fretz is important for several operational reasons, including athletics. While staggered schedules within Fretz were suggested, I believe a school functions best when students and staff operate within a common arrival and dismissal structure rather than creating schedules that significantly extend the building's day.

Just as importantly, parents emphasized how much they value programs such as the Parent Lighthouse Team, Club Days, and family engagement activities. We value these programs as well. Consolidation should not mean losing the traditions, relationships, and successful programs that make our schools special. If we move forward, preserving those opportunities will be an important part of the planning process.

Additional questions were raised regarding special education programming, safety procedures, and whether alternatives involving other District buildings should be considered. Those questions also deserve thoughtful consideration.

Through all of these conversations, we have listened and have adjusted our thinking and revised the potential consolidation timeline. The only grade-level move for the 2027-2028 school year would be third grade moving to GGB. This would create a Pre-K through grade 3 configuration and would allow the current second-grade students to remain in the same building for an additional year.

Then, for the 2028-2029 school year, fourth and fifth grades would move to Fretz Middle School, creating a grades 4-8 building.  This revised approach would eliminate the concern about splitting seventh and eighth grades between two buildings.  With the substantial decrease in student enrollment at the younger grade levels, waiting until 2028-2029 would allow larger grade levels to move on to the high school as smaller grade levels move into the building.  In this scenario, the high school would remain a 9-12 building.

As always, if you have any questions, suggestions, or concerns, please reach out to me.

Erin Waugaman