001It is now 6:00. I'd like to call special meeting of the board of education on October 30th, 2025 to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. Next item on the agenda is the redistricting discussion with MP planning group. So I will introduce you. Good evening everyone. Chair ponds. Um I wanted to provide some context for tonight's workshop. I want to thank everyone for attending. Bristol Public Schools entered into a contract with MP Planning Group led by Patrick Gallagher and Michael Zuba who were formerly from Slam Collaborative who assisted the district with the phase one redistricting. The focus of their work on phase two is develop redistricting redistricting boundaries for phase two of the reimagining BPS plan that will go into effect for the 2627 school year. As part of this process, they had developed
002updated 10-year enrollment projections, established enrollment targets for the elementary and middle schools, inventory six grades six through eight space at Greenhouse and West Bristol that is available for reuse, and created redistricting options. Today, they will provide an update on their work to date and get feedback and consensus hopefully from the board on the process moving forward. Thank you to the commissioners for participating and I will now turn it over to Patrick and Mike. Thank you for joining us in person. >> Thank you. >> All right. Good evening. Yeah, we'll have a just a brief presentation just to share an update on our work to date. Um and really our goal for tonight is to really get um some consensus on our process going forward. Um so I'll kick it off to Mike to go over
003our first couple of slides and then um thank you Kyle. Um so for today's agenda there >> all right for so for today's agenda we always like to take a look back um we'll take a recap of the um reimagining Bridgeport plan of 20 for two years we worked in Bridgeport and every time I saw BPS I would say Bridgeport so now it's like we know we're in Bristol. um kind of go over the baseline conditions. We'll talk about um implementation timeline um and really kind of get as Pat mentioned, we want to get consensus on the process of where we're at. Um if there's any changes from that prior plan, um want to be able to understand that and then kind of give some guidance as well from our experience. Um you know, we
004just didn't work on the 2022 plan. going back to my days at a prior prior firm um back in 2012 I did the um school redistricing where we opened up the K um many many years ago went through that process so I have a long history of working in Bristol so it's just kind of leveraging kind of that knowledge um applying it to this process figuring out the best pathway forward so going back to that reimagining Bristol from 2023 Um it had really four key goals of the plan. Renovating old and outdated schools. A lot of that was um both from a condition standpoint, but also from an operational standpoint. Um the redistricting that stemmed out of that did a good job at evening out utilization across the schools. Um and that overall allows for
005better use of space across buildings, better equity um across all of the schools themselves when we're looking at diversity status as well as providing space for future growth in the schools. Um and you know that was a process where we were always looking at things like class size, looking at things um to be able to project forward then for how is that going to be able to be sustainable as we work our way towards this next phase or phase two of the project. Um and then that got us that initial step of getting in that consistent grade configuration then providing opportunities for um full day u prek programming as well as um the growing need for special programs. Um so with that phase one a lot of big milestones happened. Um Bames opened um that
006was a a huge milestone. Um the edgewood elementary school closed um in the summer of 2023. um from the redistricting boundaries that were in place for 23 24 um looking at Bristol early childhood center um pre the preK as well as the readiness program became one program um the vision for that was or in a redesigned um Edgewood school facility um that's something that we're going to continue to talk about tonight and then additional changes um in to parody and enrollment balance um across all the schools themselves. So, looking ahead to kind of where we're at and setting the stage in phase two, um it's hard to believe, but NES is about to open for next. >> Um yeah, I took there some of my stuff was in this one, but I took most I
007think I got >> Oh, that's right. So, um looking at phase two with NE's opening for 26 27 um preparing for that transition now where the prior K8s are going to go into that K5 configuration. um shifting additional students into the space available within those larger K facility as well as being able to go ahead and get that redistricting in place for the middle school level to be able to reassign those students to available space in the new NEMS as well as in Chippens Hill. Um and then what we'll share tonight are the middle school attendance zones, what those look like and talk a little bit about what the future of the elementary schools are going to look like. So with that phase one redistricting process, um, typical of any real redistricting process, you want
008to be able to not only go through a process where you're looking at the enrollment trends, you're looking at how best to create that I targeted utilization or match up what that target utilization should be while providing headroom. um you go through a process of looking at busing and efficiency with the busing overall. Um I recall going back and forth making some adjustments especially nowadays with transportation such a huge cost driver want to ensure that we have a good handle of that um and then sure that that it has a sustained balance throughout. So when we did that phase one, we weren't only looking at balance from, you know, the standpoint of children and and seats themselves and the class size guidelines, but also to ensure that we had racial balance within 10% of the
009district-wide average as well as socioeconomic balance of looking at students free lunch standpoint and that 10% districtwide average. Then looking at the staffing models that we have across the board, ensure that we're, you know, staffing within our class size guidelines as well as coming as close as we can to that enrollment target to ensure that we have sustainable operations and we're getting the best efficiency that we can overall. And then for our schools that have um special programs, we're looking at there to be able to strive to have slightly lower utilization to ensure that we have those programs in these buildings themselves. leading into where we're at today. Um, Superintendent White mentioned that we went through this selection process and RFP was out, I believe, in springtime. Um, we were one of the firms that
010responded. Um, the charge was pretty well defined in that RFP. Um, it was to develop redistricting boundaries for phase two. Um, be able to implement those for the fall of next school year. Um, we'll touch on the highlights of what we've accomplished to date. Um, developing those 10ear enrollment projections. Those really provide the guidance of what demographics are telling us what areas shrinking, growing, how best do we be able to manage that enrollment changes. It's part of the balancing process with the uh boundaries, establish middle school capacity enrollment targets, confirm elementary enrollment targets um from phase one. Um so it was really building upon that work as well as um looking at some new spaces to understand what those space needs are and then develop those enrollment targets for Green Hills as well as West
011Bristol um overall as and in addition to the middle school space. Then last but not least is to be able to create a range of redistricting options and then be able to weigh those against those criteria to ensure that we are able to develop one that's not only good stand or longstanding but also one that fits the best needs of personal consumers. So with that I'll turn it over to Pat and he can walk us through the baseline conditions. >> Sure. So I'm I'm just going to give a very high level overview of some of our baseline conditions starting with enrollment. So we develop 10-year enrollment projections both districtwide and by school. Um and we are projecting um very stable enrollment over the next 10 years across all grade groupings, elementary, middle, and high school.
012Um really staying um very close to current enrollment, you know, between 7,300 and 7,400 students for the foreseeable future. Um we established enrollment targets as part of phase one that aligned with your operational and staffing model. It really defines schools as three, four or five section per grade schools, which is common for neighborhood based schools where you tend to have a consistent number of classrooms across all of the grade groupings. Um, so we uh affirmed the targets that we had established in phase one and then looked at Green Hills and and West Bristol specifically at the 68 space that would be available um once that uh once those students move to the middle schools. Uh we did walked uh we did walk both of those buildings and and inventoried the full-size classrooms that will be
013available. Um and there in addition to the grade level instructional rooms, there's also a range of support rooms, art, music, technology, and resource rooms that will become available. Um we do a lot of work with school districts around um capacity. And one of the things we always remind folks is that capacity depends on how the space is used. and you know using a K5 instructional model to fill out that space is going to be different than using that for special programs or something else. Um so we did look at if we were to repurpose that as um K5 instruction both of those schools could align with the seven section per grade model which would increase their enrollment target from 630 students today K5 to 882 students. Um so quite similar to where they operate as
014a K8 school. We also established enrollment targets for the middle schools using a team-based approach. Um the students will rotate throughout their classes uh throughout the day. Um we use the new floor plan from NEMS. Uh and also did a detailed inventory of Chipins Hill. Chippens can support up to nine teams. So three per grade uh and that results in an enrollment target of 852 students. and NEMS is being designed for eight teams with an enrollment target of 752 which aligns with the design capacity of 750. Um, one thing to note is that the enrollment targets really reflect operational best practices. We're not using your maximum loading levels. Uh, for the elementary schools, they're based on a class size of 21 students per classroom on average. So, well below your your class size maximums. And
015same with the middle schools. um we are using a little bit of a a lower class side I believe it's 23 students per classroom um and that applied the schedule back there and then we're maintaining obviously current enrollment levels at Bames which currently operates at 88 students per grade so as uh Mike had noted you know really when we kicked off this process um we had talked about uh kind of got our heads back into the original goals of the reimagining BPS um 2023 plan and we know there's been ongoing discuss discussions in the community around a number of facility projects. And so we felt um like our our framework that we wanted to propose tonight is really to take a step back and look ahead at what we need to implement for the 26
01627 school year fall 2026. Um and so really we're looking at a two-step approach um with the real the real focus being on uh creating middle school attendance zones to go into effect for the fall 26 when the new NEMS middle school opens. uh that building is going to open with a much larger capacity than we have today and Green Hills and West Bristol will move from a KH to a K5 grade configuration. And so when NEMS opens, we need to have an attendance zone established um that not only meets the design enrollment of the school, but also reassigns those Green Hills and West Bristol students and fills out um the space that we have at Chippen Hill Middle School. You know, we we've done this for gosh two dozen districts over the last 10
017years probably. Um and we always recommend that um any changes to attendance zones are adopted uh by December of the year prior to give ample time for implementation. You know, things around um obviously parental and student notifications of their assignments as well as time to look at busing, development routes, uh staff assignments, and any budget implications that may be needed for implementation. Um, and we again are are cognizant of kind of the timeline we're up against in order to get make those decisions for the fall of 2627. Uh, but we also know that um phase 2 is not just a middle school project uh but it's going to be opening up space at your K8 schools once those move to K uh to K5. But unlike the middle schools, um we have less knowns on
018on whether the plan that was envisioned a number of years ago is still 100% valid or whether there will be changes to that plan related to your facilities. Um and so what we are proposing is um uh pausing any discussions around changes to the elementary school attendance zones until the 2728 school year. uh once some of those unknowns are more clearly defined by by the district and the board. Um so we've kind of come up with a number of of things that we have noted really, you know, un unanswered questions that we really need to define in order to develop intended zones. I always say the zones follow the plan, not vice versa. Um we know there's been a number of conversations in the community around the future of Edgewood School. And so I think
019one of the important questions is going to be, you know, will that Edgewood project go forward and will those uh programs continue to be housed at Edgewood or will prek have to shift back to the elementary schools? That's going to impact how we reuse that 68 space that's available at West Federal and Green Hills. And equally as important, um it's not just a physical classroom count, but it's making sure that if they do move back to the elementary schools that we have the right space. Um, obviously the space at Green Hills and West Bristol signed for 68 students, not necessarily something we could just convert to prek without a level investment. Again, we don't have the answers to some of those really important questions. Um, we also know that Stafford capital project um is in
020your capital improvement waterfall, a major major investment in that facility planned over the next several years. Um, so another question is kind of better defining that Stafford project timeline. Now, will that renovation project require swing space? would the students stay in the building and would BPS consider consolidating you know either of these facilities? And then um probably a growing uh change that we've seen over the last three years since phase one is districtwide special programs. Uh we've seen a a a surging enrollment in those districtwide special programs. Uh many of those programs are in the former pre-K classrooms at your neighborhood uh K5 schools and they have grown to the point where they are, you know, really maxed out in their current locations. And so the the the plan really should also take into consideration
021the placement of these programs and providing that flexibility um for program growth in the future. So again, one of the things we wanted to discuss tonight is we have the consensus of the board that this is the right approach. So again, focus our efforts on the fall of 26, recognizing that there's going to need to be ongoing conversations around the elementary schools and the best for use of that 68 space um before we pull the trigger. Ultimately, it's about ensuring whatever action is taken for fall of next year won't have to be hastily undone um if a different direction is taken. So going into our recommendations for the fall of 2026. So again, this will be implemented for the 2627 school year. Um, a long-standing goal of the reimagining BPS plan was to align the
022middle school and high school attendance zones. So this would establish your pathway at sixth grade and then all the students in a middle school would then metriculate to the same high school together. um for for a number of years at least since the K8s have opened um there is not that consistent transition from middle school to high school and middle school students will be split between uh multiple uh high school buildings and so that was a a really our our test case and our jumping off point for the middle school to see can we hit these different parameters that we've set for ourselves um in order to align with um the design capacity of the new NEMS as well as you know the various other metrics that we've set Um, so this is our our
023recommended middle school attendance zones to go into effect for the fall of 2026. Uh, this is the same attendance zone map as we have for our high schools. So, uh, Shippens would follow the Bristol Central attendant zone and Northeast would follow the Bristol Eastern attendance zone. Any eighth graders moving up to 9th grade would move together u to the high school. This does have a significant one-time redistricting impact. Um so we took a look at sixth uh this year's sixth seventh graders um and identified students who lived within the areas that would be redistricted for the fall of 26. We have approximately 580 students um including all of the sixth grade students in Green Hills and West Bristol as well as most of the students who currently reside within the Hubble and Stafford groups as
024well. We did make some changes to the middle school boundaries um as part of the phase one redistricting back in 2023. Any students who were moved as part of that uh will be in the high schools and so we will not be moving any of the same individual students twice. We developed enrollment projections based on these conceptual boundaries. Um so we assume that the again the middle school attendant zones align with the high school boundaries and we return any all students to their zone school except students who will advance lottery and any students in um self-contained special programs or or alpha place. Uh we held those both of those constant at 256 levels and we continued the the current lottery model at Bames at 88 students per group. What that does is gets us a
025peak projected enrollment at Northeast of 722 students, but we will also be uh putting some of those BPS special program students within the new Northeast as well. So factoring in those students, so we have about 51 of them today in the middle school grades. Um that will get us very very close to that 750 student target um that was in your grant application. Whenever you submit a grant application to the state, they always want to see your implemented plan aligning with the designed capacity of the building. Want to make sure that they're, you know, paying for the enrollment that building was designed for. So, we really do a good job of hitting that target. Chippens would see a peak projected enrollment of about 84 students um with some additional special program students on top of
026that for the 2029 2030 school year. Um and so both schools would be operating you know comfortably um below that planning target um but efficiently so really in the the low 90% range which is really ideal um when looking at space use. >> Can I take a question? >> Um I have a couple more slides. Mind if I if I if I just roll for the last two? Um so that leaves kind of the options for discussion for implementation for the fall of 2728 and really you know the changes would be any changes to the attendant elementary attended zones for um pausing that for a year while this process um unfolds. Again, zones should follow the plan. Um, and really this is the opportunity to solidify what that plan will look like so that the
027reuse of the 68 space at the elementary schools really reflects um the direction we want to head in in terms of facility investments, operations, and programs. Um, so we've spelled out really four potential options for reusing 68 space. Um, option A is using that for uh Bristol Public Schools um special programs. So, this would move uh the self-contained programs that are currently spread throughout a number of elementary schools into either Green Hills or West Bristol. And it would also provide space to potentially move other um programs like destinations that are spread or that are located in um non-ele school facilities or or um even um some programs that leave that are maybe space in this building. really an opportunity to to free up space across uh the district, not just at the elementary schools. And
028again, with the growing enrollment um of students who have those um those high needs, it does provide flexibility for future programs and growth. Um option B is kind of a um a hybrid take on that where it would it would leverage some of that space for special programs and some of that space for K5 instruction. So increasing the the capacity of those schools from a five section per grade model to a six section per grade model and then shifting additional K5 students into those buildings. Um that would provide some buffer um across all the elementary schools um but would be more impactful. Um we did do an exercise of looking at what that map could be. Um, one of the challenges is not moving areas that were moved as part of phase one. Um, and
029being cognizant of not wanting to move the same areas into the permits twice. Um, so we would have, you know, any any changes to the tenant zones would result in areas that maybe don't make the most sense from a transportation standpoint. Um, unless, you know, accommodations are made with grandfathering or something like that. Option C, um, leverages all of the space at Green Hills and West Bristol for K5 instruction. So really maximizing those buildings as seven section per grade schools. So that 882 student model um that potentially you know uh could weren't exploring a facility consolidation. We are opening up you know if we were to use all of that space um about just under 500 seats capacity. Um you know one challenge we noted there is that you know that would again be very
030impactful for students who had moved as part of phase one. uh there would be no guarantee that students wouldn't have to be again. Um it would also limit opportunities to relocate special programs out of the other elementary schools. Um we know that that's been a pinch point um since those programs have limited space to grow in their current locations. Um so again something to consider um for the future. And then option D is um relocating preK to Green Hills and West Bristol. We know that's been discussed within the community um over the last several months. So I think one of the the key uh considerations here is to evaluate that space from a a code and function standpoint. Obviously it's 68 uh 68 space. So there would need to be a level of investment somewhere
031in those buildings to accommodate it. Uh there's also a need for ground floor classrooms for prek. Those are threetory classroom ways. So really feel like there would need to be a level of architectural analysis with an expert um who could answer those questions in terms of you know what's the number of of classroom fit within those spaces and also determine the costs associated with making that age appropriate. Um that would result in maintaining the current attendance zones. Um again looking at the the upper floors of the bill of the 68 wings I think will be an important part of that exercise. I I'll note here I I'll pass back to Mike that option A and option D are are proposing no changes to the current elementary attendance zones and are rather using the 68 space
032for a range of other programs that you offer throughout the district whereas B and C would result actual changes to the attendance zones. >> Yeah. And I'll just add that I think with with C and D es especially um especially those two options is just looking at especially C if you're looking at offloading additional students where you're wanting to gain space for special programs to really have a well thoughtout plan on delivering those programs. How many classrooms do we need? How many support spaces do we need? um because that one time redistributing can really set the stage to be able to have a potted model when you have enough classroom space as well as um Paris sport is um in an appropriate location within the schools um and then being able to have that wall
033still kind of buffering um that neighborhood enrollment. Then with option D, I know we think just naturally, you know, the K5 space remain the K5 space um and that 6A space which is vacated naturally income space or special programming. I almost feel like you need to be able to look at the entirety of the building and see if there's a better way for organize architecturally the entire building to function better be able to bring that um prek programs into that space. uh maybe pushing some of the uh upper braids, so fourth, fifth into that middle school space. Um moving functions around within the building themselves. See if there's a better way to stack and operate the building um while still being able to kind of achieve their objectives without undoing too much of that recent
034construction project because there is a fine line there. Um where the state has a certain window of projects that they funded. um if you're seeking reinvestment or changing functional use of it um they do have to be part of that conversation as well and it becomes more detailed study on what needs to be done what can be done what the cost of that is overall so that would require a level of effort that >> no problem >> so again what we're proposing tonight for for your discussion is to maintain the existing elementary attendance zones for the 2627 school year while we work through um that next plan again two of our options propose no changes to the elementary attended zones anyway. Uh so this should really be something for you know if you were to
035to change the zones for uh to pause that 2720 when are um are better defined and then this is just our baseline elementary projections. U we developed these based on the phase one boundaries. So we had to assign historic enrollment to the to the current boundaries in order to have enough historic data to make by school by grade projections. And we compared that to our enrollment targets that we had established as part of phase one. And all buildings are operating, you know, really efficiently um aligning with that three, four or five section per grade model. Um Green Hills operating slightly above the um the enrollment target and um uh IB Drive also operating slightly above the enrollment target. Ivy Drive. I think it's one of the the schools that does have a little bit of
036pressure since they also have the breakthrough program there that also has some space dates. Um, but overall the phase one boundaries are forming as as intended and it's really about defining what the next steps are part of that phase two. Now we're happy to take any questions. question. So when we found out about the workshop earlier this night, we did ask for sentiment. So that's why back and forth. Um was this a new submission? >> We sent this this week. It's really a summary of our technical work to date. We have a detailed uh presentation that has a lot of tables and maps um that accompanied that as well. >> And that was I think yeah set up this. Yeah, I think I I this was included in what I sent earlier in the group.
037So there's there was two different emails. One certain slideshow. So the one I'm looking at has more information. So trying to keep up here. >> Yeah. You should also have the version that matches this that we'll make sure that that that gets reset questions. So option A um maintains the A5 attendance zones which for those of us that work here and agree that there's lots of discussion around that. Um and the other difference between option A and option D be in option A there wouldn't be uh the opportunity to take any buildings offline. Correct. >> Um so option A yes you need to maintain the current buildings um based on our projections. Yes. the slideshow that we saw tonight. >> I think who sent his second one that we said was not shared publicly. information
038>> and then the one that's shared publicly. >> Well, if anything shared >> Yeah. Our intent was to not was to have a synced version for tonight's conversation and then version, but not to actually present it tonight. Not that it wouldn't be shared publicly just part of the presentation. >> So I believe the one that we just hear publicly was sent October 29th at 107. They were both the confusion question about your enrollment. on um decorating. Uh so if I'm not mistaken, our grade six students right now are the biggest grade in spring. So that's 2020 2026 is our they are in sixth grade. So moving to 2029 2030 a max greater subs are. >> So one of the thing we one of the things we look at is um how much a cohort grows
039or shrinks as from one grade to the next. Um, one thing we had noted when we were doing our projection update is since Bames opened, your retention rate is much greater and I think actually you may even see growth as the elementary grades move into the middle schools. So those growth rates are all captured. I believe you also have some larger elementary classes that are going to be moving into the middle school during those three peak years, the 27, 28, 29, 30. And I believe the detailed presentation that was set did have a breakdown um by grade so you can kind of track the individual cohorts as they move through. Correct. And for that 29 school year in particular, we have um 2930 we're projecting a 10th grade cohort of 665. Um all the cohorts
040would know average out to about 620 students. So it's just a function of having um two bump grades all together at once and see it drop off following year as that larger cohorts replaced by a much smaller cohort. Um bring in for 2030 31 you bring in a 550 student sixth grade cohort. So that's really kind of that demographic problem. question about you mentioned destinations which is currently at our high school um to achieve and I just want to clarify what are these options suggesting moving also destinations. So I believe in scenario A that was one of the programs that was identified as potentially moving to the 68 space at Green Hills or West Bristol um to free up some space within the high schools um for other capital projects. Um the the BPS special
041programs for the elementary grades don't fill all of the space. Um so I think part of the exercise was are there other things that we can move um throughout the district to efficiently use the space um and maybe opens up opportunities at other. So um the destinations program is um a districtwide self-contained program that has a multi classroom concept. So it's a multi-rave concept and it takes K. So um there are my opinion would be other things to consider about building a program like that to delay Kure six through eight students no opportunity for for peers here and at that higher level. I mean this is something obviously better with the expertise of our special education director. I do find that program to be be designed and located uh and wouldn't want to move it
042just to just for the purpose of filler space has to be consideration for whether uh K5 location is appropriate for that for that program. Um there's a K my understanding is the KA program classroom concept located at Bris the type of program the type of demographic that it uh meets the needs for is different than the other I don't know how the peers are arranged there. Anyway, we probably don't have to go into a lot of detail about the program because we could follow up that later, but um it wasn't also listed when I first looked at tried looking at um sure. So, we have four destinations classrooms. We have K through 2, 3 through 5, the 6 through 8. Those are housed at Bristol Eastern. We have 9 through 12 that is at P.
043Um, currently the students who are in K through 8 have no time with non-disabled peers. Their needs are so significant that they're not at the point yet for accessing um typical. If they were, we would then start talking about transitioning to other programs such as breakthrough or learning centers. I do feel like there are some opportunities having an elementary so the K through six programs in a space that has access to things like a playground for specials that they don't currently have. Um I do agree however that that does limit our 68 population given that they wouldn't have access. I do think that we could be creative on that end. It goes through tons of detail as well. >> The only reason why I bring up destinations originally given or maybe I'm selecting that presentation
044versus we didn't mention destination other programs that we ran into Excel right through. So this is just where the questions come seem to be defense there. Um, can you can you tell me again what the target capacity in your plan is for West Bao and those? >> Um, again, it depends on how the space is used. So, we inventoried 20 full-size classrooms at each building that are currently used for 68 only instructions. are 12 grade level instructional rooms, a world language room, two resource rooms, an art, music, um a wellness room, and two technology spaces. If you were to restack all of those spaces for K5 instruction, you obviously can't with K5 all those spaces. We would need most likely a second or a second music additional resource rooms. So, we're we're looking at a
045maximum under that seven section for grade model of 882 students. um is quite similar to how those schools have had operate store cases. you uh mentioned the uh in option D and assessing the space in the windows and so for how you would arrange making sure prek has their regulated spaces and then all the other buildings but they both have elevators uh have one school has two levels of grass, one the other one has one. Um but they are more most recent when you go besides M and B. Um so do do you consider that study to be large, medium, small? I mean, I realize it has to be looked at, but when you say architecturally, we're not uh we have to consider the space that we have. We wouldn't be putting out a new
046wing or new floor, you know. So, it would just be looking at the the layout design and then if there were any additional things like bathroom, you know, I that's just guess >> bathrooms and washing stations that are appropriate height. um code on the accessibility egress degress requirements what those are for on those populations. Um, >> I think it comes down to the the ground floor is going to be the key. Have enough ground floor class for Yeah. PreK and then obviously younger learners. That's kind of where I was getting at with option B where you may want to look at reshuffling up the building spaces um and trying to really leverage the ground floor and some of those tinier K one two spaces right now to see if those are a little better fit
047because sometimes you push one and two up into like what we're traditionally three or four spaces graders. Um, and that may come at a less of a a heavy lift to fit out the space and give it a little better flow and function. And I think about getting the kids in and out of the buildings, um, you know, on a regular basis where they're at within the buildings themselves, especially for drop off pickup. I think those things, um, you need, you know, it's not architectural design. It's more of um how that desired program architecture fits in the building, what little adjustments you need to make and how that could either add up or is there an easier option there than simply say keep K5 where it is and we move them into the space. Are
048we really maximizing that space? And that's where you know as planners we can think about things like that. Um but as building designers, they live that world of looking at it and you know if you know you're studying fit out that edge of a program to understand the nuances of that program, you could jump right into an architecture study of what um either could be a better fit some of those program spaces and where it be appropriate there. So the reason why I'm asking myself is it sound sounds like we don't have that information but we have options we need here for consideration well future discussion of continue prescriptions and so what would it take to get that information to know the viability of option >> what we're suggesting is that you look to be
049able to get answers to that question um and and not knowing Um, >> that's not something you >> It's not something we do, but that's a pretty common exercise for many architectural firms. I know there's one that's working on the, uh, was working on the entrance feasibility. Um, they would be very familiar with the program and looking at the floor plans, walking through the building. um you know they would be sort of um primed and ready to be able to do an assessment like that and fairly easy >> that that was with respect to the prek and the flow requirement does that cover I mean basically you have student level the ground floor first ground floor. We've got student level drop off. We're not dropping people off the front of the first floor and then
050sending it down stairs. I don't think that would meet the requirements of the development also requirements for classrooms. I I think it's more so of having egress for the smaller students which needs case members to be able to get in and out building versus the daily operations. So that's one part of it. Um but ensuring that you're not relying on an elevator and a purchase to get some number of populations out and very it's not something we pat as planners can put more things up to get into but those that are familiar with that little understand that they'll get spaces that require a recommendation space that need them up kindergarten and more have egress then emergency without requiring stairs. So say for instance at green hills you have the whole downstairs like whatever you call
051and you go to the second floor second floor eresses up to the back patio playground patio and field. to second floor would even be suitable for being made first kindergarten certain egress without requiring stairs in the event. So it was presented to us by that event. Thank you my next question because there were some interest that it included grade two but it sounds like we found out that it does great. Okay. Wait. So when would you um because of the uh the requirement to have a target adoption of the plan by December of this year defination about the usability of the window resto in November. So that's why we are are recommending pausing any changes to the elementary attendance zones for a year to give you time to work through. So obviously scenario D and
052scenario A are not going to change the attendance zones anyway. So perhaps there's an opportunity to continue to work through those, you know, on a condensed schedule to see if it could be implemented for 26 27. Um I I think our our intent of of the pause was we don't want to change. We don't want to redistrict elementary school students and then find out a year from now we need this space prek, right? >> And we got to move them again. >> We got to move them again. Um so obviously I think scenario A and D, you know, can be on potentially a shorter implementation timeline because of not having to redo busing or rental notifications, things like that. >> And and there's great spaces in those buildings that you want to fix. lacking version
053of the highest and best use right of like what is really the best use for the district for those space where can we maximize um our needs and utilize that space as part of this um and that's why for saying the the middle school the NE's opening um those boundaries stand on their own they align with the high school boundary um we're not impacting anybody redistricting anybody twice um that going back to the earlier criteria from um reimagining that that fits that to kind of the key of what we're looking at at the time. I think for the elementary school now and taking a look at it um you have a couple good options. It's just determining which of those are really kind of the best fit and should be thoughtful in our opinion and
054and plan as Pat mentioned. You know, the plan then you know kind of guides everything that's going to happen with righties to put that plan into action of this is how the attendance zones are going to look based on our desired operational and educational model. Um and you know the boundaries can be moved around to change. which is one of the things that we look at as boundaries in place. We want those to last. >> And and if I can just add, I think one of the things that we'd like to get consensus on tonight is just our approach for kind of the next step of our work when we go out to the public. We know that there's strong opinions for the different elementary options. And I think our concern is that um we're
055not going to have answers in time for December. and we want to make sure that we're giving ample notification and process to those uh active middle school fans when we're going to be moving, you know, almost 600 middle school students for next year. So, as part of our our scope of work, um we would develop an online map showing the attendance zone changes that would go into effect for fall 26, just like we did for phase one. Um that tool was very successful. um that would only show the middle school attendant zones and and would say that no elementary changes would go into effect. And then um like phase one, we would propose holding, you know, some community forums related to the implementation or next change. And by focusing on just the middle school, we
056think we can, you know, really give that process the the time and effort and consideration that it deserves without um adding in another layer um of of kind of decision- making to make that process a little more agonizing for for families. Um and so I I'd love to get kind of consensus from you all today of whether you agree with that approach. um in which case kind of our our presentation on November 5th I believe will kind of kick off that next phase of work where we can kind of start that basic side of as well as shine some light on um just a future timeline of what that elementary school looks like especially for those that were kind of wed to the reimagining plan they kind of follow that to a tea now if
057there's going to be any changes from that we want to be able to get that narrative out um because it's some instances you have, you know, parents that are watching folks, right? You have parents that may have elementary school, then you have some that are only kind of looking at the elementary lens, right? So, we want to be able to ensure that all populations that are going to be impacted. It's it's just a clear, clean message of what that what what it is from the transparency standpoint, but more so timing standpoint, right? Um there's no sense getting people upset over something that may not be done. >> Yeah. To that point, we um you're being told there'll be a board of finding. We this board unanimously passed um a motion an approval to move forward
058with u changing the uh project at Edgewood from roof only to fully renovate with additional um reimbursements that are available for preschool and possibly special ed. Um and we're being told that the board of finance is going to vote next Thursday on that, which is just a week away. If that vote uh if the board of finance supports this board's recommendation and we know next Thursday that we're moving forward with that, would that then help um with understanding that we we won't have to redistrict if we were going with plan A. >> Correct. Yeah. So like obviously the more known the the fewer options we had, right? Um, so >> and we're presenting on as well. So both will be happening at the same time. >> Oh, really? >> Wednesday. >> Oh, the sixth. The
059board of finance. >> Oh, all right. >> Thursday. especially those who will be most. So um I know the question um would you be able to link back to them now it's whoever has it yes okay so we'll talk about um impact to families and everything so we have our two middle schools are obviously on the bar now with green middle school being we have a lot of families who have had children together right for many expansive years and now taking students from the far corner of Crystal and bringing all the way up town. Uh so was that make them the most sense? I know like there's a lot of that area green. You don't have so much condensed housing and everything but does the We have the families in transportation. So it takes a
060good 25 minutes when not students. >> Yeah, certainly a a consideration. And you know, one of the things that would be kind of the next step would be to also share this map with transportation, get a sense of, you know, busing length, things like that. the there's any changes to the number of buses to hit the bus, you know, any busing length policies you may have. You know, that has to be kind of a known that you factor in budget season. Um, I think, you know, we're constrained by the locations of the two middle schools and by the fact that we have to populate Northeast with the 700 students. If you were to draw the closest areas around Northeast, it it is kind of the blue area that aligns with the Bristol Eastern attendant zone.
061Um, so I, you know, I certainly can sympathize with the the the distance. Um, I think it's just a challenge no matter what what middle school they'd go to. It's probably a long ride, but >> yeah, I think especially when you look at it with 750 enrollment, um, you wouldn't be able to cut out this entire area in the lower quadrant. You could probably have a very skinny boundary. You still would be busing up to Shippens. Shippen's much larger. You're going to have a larger catchment. I think that's going to be challenging. You don't really want to bring Northeast over any further. So, it's kind of having both middle schools on the northern tier. It's it's a locationational challenge. really is. >> And I think to another consideration for kind of our December implementation timeline,
062I don't know when your baby's lottery is to also having boundaries in place before that happens so that parents may not be may have concerns about their assignments at least have that as a choice. So for the middle school boundaries that are looking at now are looking at large differences from what we understood to be the middle school boundaries in phase one. What was projected to be the middle school boundaries for phase two when we did phase one. >> We did not develop boundaries for phase two as part of phase one, but the long-standing goal was to align the middle and high school attendance zones that we had kind of that pathway established in sixth grade. um that also was I think used to develop the desired envirment of northeast was that took 68 population
063within that Bristol eastern attendant zone and then forecasted. So that was always part of the plan. >> Yeah, that's why I think from the transportation standpoint, this has been long established between high schools, middle schools following suit with that. Um it's just really a it's funny where all of our schools are right day and age. Um and and you know having them up here versus having you know either central or you know one in the northern half one in the southern half buildings >> was what I hear a lot of families said like both schools are you know it's hard to know who the kindergartener at the hills with regards to option A and I look at the um the different uh districtwide specialized programs we name those programs into Green Hills and West Bristol.
064um when I look at the number of classrooms for those programs, we already said earlier that um doing that didn't maximize the space with just the uh everything but destinations. So the thought was also move destinations but even with moving destinations there's still uh open classrooms as far as I'm looking at right because there will be seven classrooms when the 68 moves after classrooms I know you guys looked at space but and then eight I believe at green hills we split the existing um specialized programs they were taking four and four respectively I believe I mean two more uh destinations. Uh that's the wave some focus faced there. Correct. >> You may want to talk to that. She explained it the other night. >> No, no problem. Um I think it depends on which programs.
065Um so we're kind of trying to even some of that out. You know, there's some there's some just considerations there, but we now are at we will be at seven lead classrooms by themselves, just K5. Um, we have two Excel classrooms. We have three breakthrough classrooms. Sorry. >> Say that. Just start again. Sure. Sure. We have seven lead classrooms. Um, I will share with you that depending on how enrollment goals will go live, it would have eight by default. We have two Excel classrooms. We have three breakthrough classrooms. We do have the three destinations classrooms. And just for what it's worth, you know, in order for the high school to do some of the things that they need to do like their culinary program, they need the space that destinations is using. Hence part of
066the decision making fun. Um we also had considered um possibilities of other programs in the district because we do have our access program. We do have the destination sty school although we wouldn't want to put that in the K school. Um but we had really thought about a number of different ways um to equalizing the number of students and programs. We did take a decent number of not all though but much more than four. So right now some um a couple questions just about historically what we talked about in phase one. ahead of phase one. I know there there was some intention on um locating at least I know for sure the the programs at IBM public were done advance of the baseline so that those students could settle etc and are you anticipating uh
067their vulnerable populations too so I don't know that it was widely understood that their programs could be moving again and what will be the impact to those students and families on moving them again. most concerned about that because we did with intention trying to get them out of the fray the very first time and I thought that was a good a good and they're kind of settled now where they are but we also have to consider what's good for the program and we've seen our students and is this a better space all those things right we use the expertise of those that decisions um so that would be one concern of mine the second would be you know izing the space and not just specialized programs because then does that disproportionately put uh does it
068put a heavy uh does a front row specialized versus traditional classrooms like what are the weight what is the weight of that balance by moving all those now they're spread out a little more across the district so you'd be concentrating of influenc the staff piece of you know, we're going to put the staff where the programs are, but the experience with the rest of of the school and and the needs there. Um, I don't know what the proportionality would be. I'm sure you're thinking of that, but those are just things that come to mind for me those programs. >> No, thank you for those details. Um, so yes, I can share, you know, when we looked at uh we've made different models, but on average it looks to be about I'd say less than 100
069students in total. So the proportionate to of program students versus those um would not even come close enough. Um but there are a couple um of positives to that. So one of the difficulties we're running into thinking um is that our program needs are growing exponentially. We needed to open this up in classroom. Why could we do that at Hubble nor at set? There simply is no room to do that. So we've already roached into green walls. So that's one thing. The second thing is that we have an opportunity with the C grant still hasn't been. But the intent of the seed grant is for us to develop more programs with supports and related services that we can service more students district. We can't grow any further where you are right now. So I can
070share with you this here too. uh we do in terms of our breakthrough program there is no space to go another consideration that we also thought about is you know when our students transition between a restrictive program so uh destinations for example if we were at a point that we thought you know what I think you're ready for the step down now you need to transition over to an entire movie if we were strategically putting them together not only is the expertise together but then your step counties right in the same spot so that it's less of transitions between buildings. So I wanted you to know some of that in there. We even went as far as to look at where all of the students homechools were so that we could minimize or maximize maximize
071the home school but then minimize the cost for transportation. So strategically putting them together there was also a lot and then even we went as far as to say you know if the programs are centralized as such then the leadership who oversees those programs can be more centralized rather than split across the block programs. So there's a lot of different details that we looked at. It started to make me go through what's kind of more, but I think those are the biggest ones that I want in that thought process because of the um multi multra classrooms and destinations where you're looking to like a better way to explain it splitting them in half and taking the K80s that live on this side and put that one over and bring those and then the K3s. So
072we'll have a full K program. So destination to destination whole thing to one school aligned with similar type of programs so that there's step up and step to hold the same place. The expertise is centralized and the leadership centralized as well. But we did look at numbers and we also you know have to think about um the impact to the building based on what the student needs are. So, we did look at that as well to make sure that where we were placing them didn't overburden one versus another. Um Amy, just for the commissioners that weren't at the board of finance when Tammy was able to speak to the prek um benefits that were realized once they were all in one space and how transitioning three and fouryear-olds um in other locations where they're not
073all together had impacted and if you could just speak to that because I mean was she when she explained it was very profound. >> Yeah. >> Um and so >> she spoke to um when we used to have the school readiness classes versus uh stu uh programs that service students with disabilities. So what was happening is that if you qualify for school readiness, you are in your local home but if you require special service then you couldn't be in your home anymore. You needed to go to the back center to get the specialization. and she really gave a telling story about like by the age of three she was terrible my child failed their own school and they had to go elsewhere but none of their to um I have to say I also share
074the same sentiment of having the centralization I love it for the kids that I selfishly I have to say it really helps to condense some of the resources that we have um we have quite a plethora of service providers there that I would have to consider schooling and I worry about the amount of funds that we would spend done simply allowing staff to transition across the district rather than just simply being together. Um is that the story you are trying? >> Yeah. And just that when the transition would have to happen if we would now have different programs in different schools for preschool and they had to maybe move to another school if the specialization was there. the transition for a child with autism is could take months and you're not learning when you're emotionally
075not ready to kind of regulate. So right now our um Edgewood PreK Academy pattern has 14 classrooms. We have two autism lead programs but I can share with you that by the fall I likely need to have two more autism classrooms and maybe even have a career program. GMI simply won't house that at this point. Um again if we were moving them into the to different types of programs I do start to worry about the number of classrooms as well as that specialization that needs to happen and you're right that you know then we start to separate in terms of well if need the program then you need to go here versus elsewhere I mean yes you could technically but then you're decentralizing the staff that are really coordinated for you know we have a
076really strong autism staff that works together with an integrated OT language that would now be this mantle. What is it doable? Yes. But not ideal. >> And and when we had the bud center at the senior center, we also had prek in other buildings as well or no, the first time around or during this last? >> No, before. >> Yeah, we did. So, so any student that was school readiness was in a home school and any student that received special services went to them. Okay. And so segregated. >> So then when we lost back and we moved in when we opened the preschool academy, >> you brought everybody. >> We brought everybody together. So when we then needed to leave the prek academy and go into school, well potentially we were going to go into
077classrooms that were in existence and back, which is what we did initially before we got GMI. Correct. We had to still >> we did use spaces for different types of things. So you know in our prek we have five speech and language pathologists 18 BCBA going after a program we have an evaluation team sensory spaces. So we did um just eliminate some of them for the time being but we did have to have us to find spaces for an evaluation team for a PPT team for um we had them spread all over. We try to keep our students as centralized as human possible. >> I think why I'm bringing it up or just trying to understand is that it's not classroom to classroom. So it wasn't an equal number of classrooms that we lost just
078out of the schools because Beck was no longer here. So it was more classrooms than were realized. And that's why I think it seems like there's more classrooms because we were scattered and had >> think we highlighted all the different areas we were using right the district >> um to function. And I can tell you it was very challenging uh to have an evaluation team in this building but the services were over in this building. compete team was over in this building. Um it was quite the challenge but our people are very humble and great workers. >> Thank you for explaining that one question. >> The CR so some of the things that I heard just in this and I I know we're uh we're asking about specialized programs because those are what are going
079to be potentially you know moving in uh in one of these options. So I think it's important thing to to ask these questions. If you're we are saying that the programs need expansion especially and you're looking at the C grant do that are does the C grant is that something that applied for yearly is it a multi-year grant? It is a multi-year grant. So, they've sent out information for us and they've given us some Q&A, but we don't have the full rundown of it. Um, we were so excited. I was going to write it yesterday by the end of the game. And they went in and it's um so soon as it is available, it did get voted on as of July 1st, but it's not released yet. So, I don't have all of the
080specifications. >> Correct. >> And um you would would you ideally be using that money for the staffing needs that you're looking at to Yeah. >> Uh yeah. So in order to outfit the programs and then the staffing to develop the program. Um you know I know that their intent is to bring students back home. But as I've shared with superintendent White I think we need to stabilize in district first before we consider bringing students out of district back because the need is already here and we're really struggling with what we just had here. Well, not only that, but uh there's other challenges with trying to bring people that bought two nails to get agree or their student there. We have so many correct other considerations willing to connect. So it's some it's some investment that
081we'reing more out in the future more than >> that would be down the road but we have a need right now that is pretty pervasive that really looks >> right and I'm thinking because right after October and November redistricting is budget season so I'm making sure that you know if we're going to consider an option A which doesn't take a a building offline plus the option A want to try to expand basis. We also need the funding to put towards those programs, but we just had to cut some funding of existing programs that we have. There's a lot of competing forces at the same time, right? And all those things are going to be considered in January. >> I agree. And and so uh I also just want to be very clear that I understand
082the gains and the benefits having gotten a great day all in one place as far as administering the program and the specialist level staffing and then we're still challenged with all these other issues in the district. Right? So let's say that's the Cadillac version and I think and being and I was here for the very first phase of reimagining public schools. I know not all of us, you know, have that support really doing a good job catching up with information, right? And I think originally too when the prek academy was that idea was like it was going to be a possibility here that there was also a thought that the state was going to fund universal prek to a much greater extent. So, and they haven't and they haven't funded their full promise to the
083percentages of excess cost sharing that they keep promising us they'll give us a certain percentage and year after year after year it's less than and unfortunately you know I agree completely that is the reality. I do have to share though that um under the leadership of Miss Sugarman, she was able to get five additional seats last year. So that does bring us to get we actually have the ability to get five of those seats. Um unfortunately Giamati Center is not allowing us to grow in that capacity. So for us really we have the ability to bring more funds in but certainly not anywhere close to what was promised. >> No, nobody's arguing that you guys can't stay in G. I mean, I I don't think there's any disagreement here with that, right? And you really
084don't want to be the first time, but when I'm thinking about the option D and I'm just, you know, it's it's about keeping an open mind about the pros and cons, all the pros and cons and the future needs, but also the future budget limitations and the future past behavior predicts future behavior with the state. I just don't see this windfall of money coming to the state where we can have higher expectations other than the thousand% efforts that our staff puts in at trying to find every grant under the sun. But grants are vulnerable, right? And if we're going to attach people and jobs to grants, it does give them a little more vulnerability. My point being if if the Cadillac version was keeping them all together, right? But if the step down with the
085Cadillac was splitting it in two in more modern facilities sooner and then the staff only had to go between two locations, it's still better than putting them all back in multiple locations, right? I mean, I would agree if I I mean, clearly I think everyone's at my first choice is up here, but >> if if I were to give a second choice, I think breaking them in path would be my next. Um although again, I'd have to advocate that that is not something I really support and I don't think it's ideal. >> Amy, if I could just ask you question. >> Yeah. On that note, um what I what I keep hearing is well what I know right now is that we have the ability to have Edgewood back at no additional cost. The what
086I'm hearing from other commissioners that could be a concern is as we grow the costs of course will increase if we add programming, but we're going to have to add the programming based on student need regardless of space. Correct. Correct. Okay. So, if we're in ideal space, that's less expensive. Or if we're in the two spaces, that is might seem faster, but will require us to duplicate staff, which costs more, and then also um still pay for the additional staff because the program grows. We're not incurring more cost by being in a more idealist space. We're incurring less cost because we won't duplicate staff. Correct. And you know, I understand the impacts of what estate promises. Ideally, again, this is my opinion, but hearing the benefit of renovating as new in the city uh person,
087and I'm one of them, uh less money than it would to repair seems like an an optimistic >> and less operational >> and and it keeps our staff together and it supports transportation. It supports a number of different things. And we also have already used some of the state funding to renovate Edgewood and fit it to 3K prior to the roof structure issue. And if we do not use that building as a prek, we owe that money back to the state because they get they make you keep it as a prek for a certain amount of time. and I believe were hundreds of thousands of dollars um spent when we fit the building for the temporary amount of time that we were that part I'm not sure of. >> I think that this was touched
088upon here as well. I think you might have mentioned it in your presentation. Were you speaking of that? >> I was speaking on the K8 not I don't know the nature of the project. Tara has reported on that multiple times so we can have her uh speak to it next time if other commissioners want the information. >> Typically a club or space that they find grants for educational use certain window but that is possible depending on >> right okay >> through the chair. >> Yes, >> this is Tara Landon. >> Hey Tara, >> how are you? >> I can't believe you're just there. It's like you're like the Oz. >> Well, I I did hear what you were saying and I do just want to definitely get the clarification out there. >> So, we have
089expended money against the um pro projected costs that we've been awarded. So, so we've been approved for the grant through the state at 16.8 million, but I have not yet applied for any payment from the state. So although we've been approved, the state actually hasn't given us any money toward that. The monies that we've used is in fact the monies that were allocated from the city side. >> Um from so I just wanted to clarify that information. >> That was a couple hundred,000 close to >> that was about $264,000 that's been spent uh spent out to date. >> Okay. Thank you. So >> now going forward, if we continue with the um the project, if we continue with the project, we would apply for reimbursement on those funds that were expended, but I have not
090applied to the state to get reimbursement on anything to to date. >> Okay, that's good to know. So we could recover that 264. >> Absolutely. A portion of it. Yes. >> That's great. >> Tara, while you're there, can I ask another quick question? >> Sure. um when the uh or the builder's view options that we were given in a previous meeting, the 85% reimbursement is the grant that was already approved, the 16.8 million, but hasn't been given yet. And there was going to be an additional grant for the additional um 15% up to 99. >> And but at the last meeting when when um we're saying that that was possibility uh I don't know that we knew the exact status statutoily of where that was and if we can definitely apply for it yet. Was
091there an update on that? No, the the the state department of ed had the last terara spoke I spoke to terara and she can speak to this is that they're determining the process for applying but I've read the statue anyone could read the statue online and the parameters are what our school is. So >> no I know that I'm just saying when does the timeline fit in and is it a viable something that we could apply for now? Do we even know that like when when is the opportunity to apply for it and have a better understanding as to whether or not we actually are going to get the other 10%. >> Sure. Do you have an answer to that? >> Yes, please. >> Sure. So, we're definitely looking into it still and like um
092Commissioner Pon had mentioned, we're we're in a we're kind of in a holding pattern. We're looking into it further because the legislation did come out after we got the original approval for this grant. So that's the first thing we have to make sure that we're eligible because we actually were approved for the grant through the state prior to this legislation coming out. So that's the first step. And once we get that, you know, yes, you can apply, we're going to definitely work towards applying for it. Now, I there is not a date yet. We haven't give been given the yep, you can definitely apply or it's definitely a position where anybody can apply for, but we're still we're still kind of doing that research. But as soon as I find out, I'll I'll definitely share
093that with the committee. >> The one part that was exciting about it was it said you can't exceed 100% and so we're right in that 1% margin of >> correct. >> Yeah. So bringing us to as high as you can go without not being eligible like a unicorn. >> Yes. >> Um yes. Um Oh, okay. >> Any more questions for everybody? >> So, one of you said you stated goals was um before you left here tonight um was to get um consensus on your process. So, um I think the things that you mentioned about doing community forums, the maps that you mentioned are very important as you know because that's why you're here. Um, but keep the concentration on the middle school maps I think is important. But do we still have the phase one
094map so that people can go in and put in their address? Well, not because it impacts your work, but so we have people that might still be new coming into the community and they want here phase one. So if everybody can just go in and keep looking up their addresses the way we laid it all out for fives initially. Is that still available on our website? Used to be. I just couldn't find it last minute looking for it. >> So, um, typically we'll keep it up during a redistricting and then after that refer to the street list. The the issue we've come across is that the search is good 99% of the time, but sometimes where it puts the dot is a little bit off where the house is. We can't control that. Um, so
095the street list is kind of your authoritative source. So, it's always good to point folks to that. >> Okay. So, street list for regular kids >> for the elementary. Yeah. And then we'll have the online viewer which will capture most of it. But the problem with the elementary was that it's circa 2022. So any addresses since then new subdivision development department um likely aren't going to show up in that older viewer. Um so you know we always kind of it's it throws a big net but it's not a net that catches every single one. And >> I think having having the middle school boundaries align with the high schools makes it easy because people probably know if they're if they're Eastern or Central. Um I know that that was one of the things set in
096phase one is don't don't touch the the high schools. Everyone has a lot of pride on on what side of town. So that should make it easier. >> So the next meeting is November 5th. I think it would be um very important for our district leadership to make sure that final notification goes out that this is definitely part of the agenda. have to say that I uh I don't know that there was a good saturation amongst the community that you guys are coming tonight and that >> this was for um the board members who may not have been here previously. Just like a recap to next week is the Yeah. for everyone because the community heard all this here. >> Yeah. Yeah. Today tonight was like a recap but also to kind of set the
097stage so we're all clear on the process and next steps so everybody can communicate in kind of the same manner. system. Um what is the like is there a what's the benefit to having students go from the same middle school to the school right like the center chip you automatically go central >> you have continuity with your peer groups I think when you have a split and a lot of there are some splits out there in different um school districts it's just having a large enough split where the kids are moving from that middle school environment into a high school with a large enough peer group, right? You don't want to have small areas that are split because ultimately you're going to end up in a larger high school. You don't really you've never intertwined
098other than maybe outside of school with a lot of those children. So um I think it's a good model to have that continuity there um with the peers. Um I think here one of the challenges would been um the splits would have been smaller than communicate to that current. >> Yeah. Current the current. Yeah. >> We have a lot of parents that want out of district and have to transport their kids. Their kids want to be their friends. >> K, they get to >> Yeah. >> I think another benefit too is that we could kind of align some of the curriculum and go through where it's, you know, continuity of what the middle school program is offering and then you want to extend that up into the high school. It allows for a little better
099programming options there rather than having that lab just a couple additional items on consensus on process backup process. So if um once the presentations are given to making sure that they're on our website so we can refer back them sometimes. So it's just reality the development. So I would ask that we do that again this time like we did with our phase one. Um also in phase one we had um in 22 and 23 we were considering multiple options at the same time similar actually and we are right now much larger and we did do a community feedback component when there were you know you were slimming down the options and whether or not the board was leaning one way but then we did uh a community forum and then actually took in the feedback
100back from the community to hear that that piece of it. I would like to see that again at this if time allows and if possible because I think there will be some especially with that options as I see them now. Um so I would ask either coordination and the district leadership that we do the same as well. >> Yeah. And I I recall last time we had an email set up for the district. um questions were able to on the right in both general as well as specific to students that did have some needs that would be handled as part of I just had I just have one thing and it's uh I believe it's slide 20 would be the uh scenario a middle school the one for the projections from 25. >> I think
101I got >> the one. So, um I I guess the question I have is uh I'm noticing that the projections for for the special uh special programs as well as the health programs change in as we've heard tonight that significantly. Um you know that's a that's an important fact. Is there any way we can maybe look at those numbers? So we can't project small groups like that with any reliability, but if if that number does increase, and to your point, it likely will, that will come out of the Northeast and Chippen's numbers that are already there. So it's not like they'll be additive, right? It'll be, you know, when when we're thinking about the kids in the schools, right? Northeast is going to be 722 plus, let's just say 20 of those BPS special program
102students. So it'll be 742. If that grows to 30, the number is still going to be 742. They'll just have fewer in traditional pathway and more special pathway. Um, we've been talking about like moving prek as a green. uh why are we going to consider just those if first space that's a bad consideration you know it's why would we not for example >> so I um prior to um are too merciful, too. But to that cell to their team, I got um Then I was cases. Good answer. It was the absorption of edgewood and then all the subsequent dominoes were to be able to level out the >> So the only way to that would that you' free up the spaces you redistrict students out >> the only other thing that I have questions along
103with the building. I hope that I think >> Thank you. Thank you so much. So that was the last item on our agenda. Um so the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Yep. I got all I got my little broom jacket. I got my slim party balls. Just a throwback.