Updated Elementary Enrollment FAQs

 

FAQs

Will there be an opportunity for community input as the administration moves forward with its analysis and recommendation?

Yes. Community input and involvement have always been a priority and will continue to be part of the decision-making process. Going forward, community involvement at public Board meetings will be affirmed, and the District plans a public session, apart from regularly scheduled Board meetings, of which details will be shared in the next couple of weeks.

Did the Board of Education break Sunshine Laws?

The Board of Education does not believe so. While Friends of Lakewood Schools has alleged a violation of the Open Meetings Act, the meetings in question were organized by the superintendent as part of the Elementary Planning Task Force. Board members attended as observers — they did not deliberate as a board, nor sit together. The intent was to hear directly from community members, not to conduct Board business. Board members also did not attend the final two meetings, where key findings were developed. There was no intent to violate the law. 

Was the demand letter the only reason the task force work was paused and the final report was never presented?

Yes, it is why we paused initially, under the direction of Board legal counsel.  But as a reminder, the demand letter was sent to the District in the middle of May. Throughout the summer, our legal team communicated and attempted to reach a compromise with the Friends of Lakewood. Unfortunately, we are not sure a compromise can be reached.

Will the task force findings be made public in the future? 

The District hopes to publish the task force’s key findings report at some point. The thoughts, considerations, recommendations, and final analysis of this hard-working and citizen-based committee, with varying perspectives and viewpoints, deserve to be heard and understood by the community at large. Some task force members have publicly shared the group’s findings on their own. 

What is the new data the superintendent has said she intends to collect to help her arrive at her recommendation to the Board?

New data is being collected to make the best possible recommendation to the Board. The superintendent and her administrative team are currently working to obtain and analyze the most recent enrollment data, staffing, and current boundaries. The superintendent is in the process of developing a recommendation and decision timeline and will share that information in the next couple of weeks. 

Does the superintendent have the authority to recommend repurposing or closing a school without community input? 

Yes, but while the superintendent does have that authority to make such a recommendation to the Board, community input, administrative oversight, Board of Education feedback and direction, emails, phone calls, media inquiries, and other forms of community input have been offered through a variety of mediums for over 12 months. The superintendent intends to make the most advantageous decision for students’ best interests, one that affirms the community’s values as practically as possible, and one that is ultimately accountable to the taxpaying citizens of Lakewood for the responsible management of its school district.

Why can’t the District house a before-and-after care for preschool students in each elementary building?

Before and after preschool programs for children under 5 years old must meet stricter early childhood facility standards—including separate bathrooms, specific adult-child ratios, and age-appropriate spaces. If preschoolers are added to a K–5 building, these requirements still apply, regardless of the existing setup.

In addition, students concentrated in one building makes more economic sense:

• More kids under one roof = enough demand: When all preschoolers are in one building or fewer buildings, there are enough children needing care before and after school to make a care program worthwhile. 

• Spreading costs = lower price: Running care takes resources—staff, space, and supervision. When you have many children together, these costs (staff time, building rent, utilities) can be shared across more families. That means less cost per child, which translates to more affordable care. In economics, it's called economies of scale.

• Too few kids in separate buildings = too expensive: If each of the seven elementary schools has just a handful of preschoolers, it’s inefficient. You still need staff, space, and overhead—but few kids to share the cost—so the price for families becomes very high.

Why This Matters:

• Higher quality and sustainable care: When demand is sufficient, providers can offer consistent, reliable before-and-after care.

• Better affordability:  With more children in one location, the program can keep fees lower, making it accessible to more families.

• Less financial burden: Parents don’t have to pay excessive rates, which lessens stress and increases support for families.

Why did the District wait to start the Elementary Planning Task Force while the data shows a stabilization in the elementary enrollment? 

Timeline & Rationale Behind Starting the Task Force

• Decline and Stabilization Trends: The District had experienced a significant long-term decline—over 1,000 students lost since 2015—resulting in underutilized schools operating at an average of 66% capacity:

Building Capacity Utilization:

• Right-Sizing Over Time: As enrollment declined, the District responded by right-sizing staffing through attrition—choosing not to replace retiring or departing staff—to manage costs responsibly before initiating major structural changes.

• Timing of Task Force Launch: The District convened the task force in August 2024, marking the transition from internal operational adjustments to a formal strategic and community-driven planning phase.

Why Start When We Did?

• Long-Term Underutilization Was Clear: Enrollment might have shown faint signs of stabilization, but the buildings remained significantly underused (down an average of 66% capacity). That alone justified a systematic approach to realignment.

• Fiscal Responsibility First, Structural Changes Later: The District prioritized managing costs through staffing adjustments (attrition) first—demonstrating fiscal responsibility—before escalating to potential school closures or repurposing.

• Need for Community Engagement and Legitimacy: Launching a transparent, multi-stakeholder task force (including parents, teachers, administrators, and community members) allowed for data-driven scenario development and community input, rather than top-down decision-making. It ensured the process was grounded in values like neighborhood preservation and walkability.