Task Force Member Speaks Out: "Not a single one of the district’s 6 scenarios can be implemented as proposed"
- Preserve Lakewood Schools
- Sep 8
- 5 min read
Zach Robock, Lakewood resident and member of the Elementary Planning Task Force, shared the following remarks at the Lakewood school board meeting on September 2, 2025.
"We have been evaluating the merits of closing one or two elementary schools for over a year. Stepping back, however, a threshold question was overlooked – Are the proposed scenarios physically possible as designed - are there enough classrooms available in each school? Surprisingly, the answer is “no”. Not a single one of the district’s 6 scenarios can be implemented as proposed because at least one school in each case requires more classrooms than that school has available.
In March, the district modeled out the number of classrooms per grade per school using a 22-student maximum for K-2 and a 25-student maximum for grades 3-5.
Under Scenario 1 - Repurpose Lincoln - there would be a large influx of students to Horace Mann, which would require 18 classrooms. One problem - Horace Mann only has 15 classrooms available. The rest are reserved for the CHAMPS special education programs, and these special education resources should not be on the table for any cuts, consolidation or repurposing.
Under Scenario 2 - Repurpose Roosevelt - Horace Mann still comes up 1 classroom short.
Under Scenario 3 - Repurpose Grant - Roosevelt would be short by 2 classrooms.
The other 3 scenarios involved repurposing 2 elementary schools and are even worse.
This data is available in the March 12 PPT on Slides 18-20 + the February 19 PPT Slide 11.
These scenarios were supposed to “optimize facility usage”. The district has steadfastly defended them against huge community concern. However, they fail to satisfy the basic math of ensuring enough classrooms in every school.
Could the scenario boundaries be redrawn to avoid overcrowding and ensure every student has a roof over their head? Possibly, but to make the math work, it appears to require essentially redrawing the scenarios by adjusting a hundred or more students in each scenario – and this is just to achieve 100% capacity where every single classroom is occupied. To achieve the district’s desired utilization of 80% would require even more extensive rework.
It’s tempting to think that each classroom over capacity would require adjusting just the one classroom’s worth of students. In other words, that being one classroom over capacity can be solved by adjusting boundaries for 20-25 students. However, it does not work that way. Boundary lines are drawn geographically, not by age. You cannot just redistrict one 5th grade classroom in isolation. Those kids don’t all live on the same street. Each school houses 6 grade levels (Kindergarten through 5th). You would need to redistrict roughly 6 times the number of student overage - because for every 5th grader, you’re also going to affect kids in grades K-4 who live in the same boundary. This will amount to roughly 1/3 of the entire school. Those redistricted students will influence other schools' enrollment, creating a ripple effect across the entire district's number that would amount to essentially reworking the entire scenario. Since all 6 scenarios suffer from this issue, this would require substantially reworking every scenario under consideration.
A root cause of this issue is that the district used incorrect data to draw the original scenario boundary lines. The original data did not differentiate between general education classrooms and special education classrooms in Horace Mann or Emerson, which need to be considered separately to ensure those special education resources are firmly protected and not at risk of any cuts or consolidation. The original data also erroneously overcounted Roosevelt's capacity by roughly two classrooms' worth of students. Task Force members helped point these issues out - and the district provided significantly improved data in February 2025. However, the scenario boundaries were never redrawn based on the February 2025 data, and just last week the district inexplicably reverted to promoting the original incorrect data instead of the February 2025 version in its capacity/utilization FAQ responses.
I have been raising this issue to Sup. Niedzwiecki and Pres. Katzenberger privately since March, and to the larger Board since April when the full extent of the issue became clear. They dismiss this as a nonissue because, they say, the scenarios are based on projections and they will draw final boundaries with actual data. However, this is precisely the issue - those final boundaries will look substantially different than the scenario boundaries we have been evaluating. If boundaries for 100’s of students need to be reworked from the current proposals, then it will affect all of the walkability, safety, teacher movement, and other data that underlies any decision whether to close a school – and if so, which one. This is not a disciplined, data-driven solution.
Shifting gears - I think starting the Task Force and evaluating elementary enrollment was a responsible idea with a levy on the horizon, and the Board deserves recognition for its foresight in evaluating whether there are savings opportunities before a levy. A substantial levy is expected, regardless of school closure, and it would have been strategic for the district to leverage community support for seven schools into momentum for passing a levy. The Board articulates wonderful ideals about equal class sizes, minimizing teacher movement, and more - all while maintaining walkability, safety, community and expanding early childhood. I think we are all aligned in these ideals, and I’m personally open to repurposing a school where the supporting data demonstrates this vision and appropriate support for affected families.
The problem is that the district’s proposals do not actually demonstrate that they advance these ideals. Not only that, the specific proposals offered demonstrate a worsening of some of the exact issues the district desires to improve. After a year of discussion and tens of thousands of dollars on consulting fees, the district has not put forth a single plan where every student and teacher has a roof over their head - let alone demonstrated a measurable benefit to the community. How can we trust that this administration is going to somehow be able to design and execute a workable plan in less than a year, while also standing up a preschool?
We speak often about the many other priorities that we'd all rather focus on than debating school consolidation. Choosing to repurpose a school is not the end of this journey, it would only mark the beginning of the climb. Who is going to actually do all of this work? How much will it cost in consultants, district resources, and community energy? What other priorities will it detract from? None of this was ever meaningfully discussed during or after the Task Force - it would be premature to make a decision without at least a preliminary project plan outlining the steps required and ensuring the resources required are budgeted and available.
Enrollment has stabilized, building utilization is relatively balanced, and we received increased funding under the latest state budget. Our local school system is and should be a bright spot of stability and success amid chaotic state and national circumstances, not a flashpoint for unnecessary community angst."
News is moving fast. Sign up to get updates directly from Preserve Lakewood Schools so you’re always in the loop. Sign Up Here!
