The Truth About Grant Elementary: Rebuilt by Voters Who Are Still Paying On It, Undermined by the Board
- Preserve Lakewood Schools
- Sep 11, 2025
- 5 min read
There seems to be a deeply held belief by the current Board of Education that Grant Elementary should never have been rebuilt.
Yet the facts tell a different story - and raise serious questions about why Grant is being targeted now, less than a decade after the district spent millions of taxpayer dollars to build a new facility.
What the community decided and what’s happened since
Lakewood’s Board of Education has a history of attempting to close Grant Elementary. They voted in February 2010 to close Grant Elementary, causing a community uproar, after which they reversed their decision.
It should be noted that at the time that the Board of Education voted to close Grant, current Board of Education member Betsy Shaughnessy was Board President, and she has served continuously on the Board of Education continuously for 29+ years.
In 2013, Lakewood voters decisively approved a bond issue, 70% in favor and 30%, opposed to rebuild three new elementary schools (Grant, Lincoln and Roosevelt) and complete renovations to the high school. You read that correctly - that was only 12 years ago.
Construction at Grant was completed in 2015. Families trusted that decision, based on promises of modern facilities, neighborhood walkability, safe drop-offs, and long-term usage.
Now the district is considering repurposing or closing one or more of these three newest elementary schools - despite the decisive mandate in 2013 from Lakewood voters to rebuild all three.
As of a few months ago, there is still roughly $42 million outstanding with a final maturity of 11/1/2043. Whether the District continues to operate those buildings as elementary schools, or vacates and sells them to a developer or other buyer, Lakewood taxpayers are still responsible for repaying the bond.
The “capacity crisis” argument doesn’t hold up, not even according to the district’s own data
One of the key talking points from the Board and district leadership is that closing a school is necessary to better utilize facilities. But a recent statement by Elementary Planning Task Force member Zach Robock (a Lakewood resident and member of the Elementary Planning Task Force) highlights a major flaw in the district’s own planning:
"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.” Read his full statement here.
Some specifics:
The district modeled classroom needs by assuming a maximum of 22 students in K-2 and 25 students in grades 3-5.
Under Scenario 1 (repurpose Lincoln), Horace Mann would need 18 classrooms, but only has 15 available (with some already reserved for CHAMPS special education) - so it doesn’t even have the physical capacity.
Under Scenario 2 (repurpose Roosevelt), Horace Mann is still short one classroom.
Under Scenario 3 (repurpose Grant), Roosevelt would be short two classrooms.
The other three scenarios (which involve repurposing two elementary schools) are even worse. Every one fails the basic test of available space versus projected need.
Robock further pointed out that the original scenario boundary maps were drawn using flawed or incomplete data (for example, not distinguishing general education vs. special education classroom capacity, and overcounting Roosevelt’s capacity by roughly two classrooms).
Because of these mistakes, any plan would require redrawing boundaries - moving hundreds of students - just to make the numbers work at 100% theoretical classroom occupancy. To meet the district’s desired 80% utilization target would require even more radical reworking.
What does that tell us? The district’s own consolidation/repurposing proposals aren’t feasible as-designed, even after 9 months of deliberation. They don’t actually solve a capacity problem, they create one.
Why the decision to rebuild Grant makes sense (even now)
Given that closing Grant doesn’t relieve any capacity pressure because none of the district’s proposed scenarios are physically possible, the case for preserving Grant becomes stronger:
Grant is not driving overcrowding elsewhere. The projections suggest shifting students to other schools would create shortfalls, not relieve them.
Closing or repurposing Grant introduces logistical chaos. To even approach feasibility, boundaries would have to be redrawn in ways that disrupt students across many grades and neighborhoods. The ripple effects (walkability, traffic, teacher assignment, peer groups, community cohesion) would be substantial and unpredictable.
Taxpayer investment is still relevant. The district remains liable for bond payments on Grant. If the facility sits under-utilized or is repurposed away from neighborhood schooling, the community still bears the cost while losing the educational and community value.
Preserving walkable neighborhood schools matters. Grant’s rebuild reaffirmed the district’s commitment to a neighborhood-based model where students walk or have short commutes, minimizing traffic and maximizing safety. Reassigning students to further schools risks undermining that model.
There are new housing developments being built at the center of town. As explained by Mayor George “Lakewood expects to add a minimum of 400 to 600 housing units in the next two to three years, and possibly many more beyond that”. The draw of a walkable neighborhood elementary school in proximity to those city center developments would underscore the benefit of choosing to move to and stay in Lakewood.
A more responsible path forward
Preserve Lakewood Schools urges the Lakewood Board of Education:
Stop treating the district’s six scenarios from the Task Force as definitive. They’re not workable in their current form. The same scenarios were presented TO the Task Force at their first meeting and the process ended with the same scenarios. No out of the box alternatives were given any proper analysis. Before any decision is made, the Board should require updated boundary modeling that uses accurate classroom data (general vs. special education), realistic enrollment projections, and a full mapping of walkability, drop-off logistics, and traffic/pedestrian safety. Open this up to truly broad community engagement that welcomes all voices and ideas equally.
Engage the community authentically and deeply. Parents, neighbors, real estate professionals, and safety experts should be part of boundary/redistricting discussions, not just staff/Board-selected task forces.
Consider flexible alternatives. If savings or consolidation are deemed necessary, look at phased or partial approaches, repurposing only part of a building, or co-locating community or pre-K services without eliminating neighborhood school functions altogether.
Try redrawing boundaries first, without closing an elementary. If there is no emergency and nothing is on fire like the District has repeatedly stated, why not start with the least disruptive solution? Have all incoming kindergarteners redistricted to better balance enrollment and see how that works to address any perceived issues.
Respect the original commitment made to Lakewood taxpayers with the passage of the bond issue. The community approved the rebuild of Grant, Roosevelt, and Lincoln with the unwritten expectation that those facilities would serve students for decades. The community did not agree to fund a centralized preschool that would weaken our elementary density, create traffic disruptions, and potentially not even have enough students to fill a building. The Board should honor that trust unless it can present a fully transparent, feasible, data-backed, and minimally disruptive alternative.
In conclusion
The narrative that Grant shouldn’t have been rebuilt or that it is now a problem doesn’t hold up under scrutiny, particularly when even the district’s own scenario proposals are shown to be physically impossible as drawn. Far from creating a capacity crisis, Grant, just like the other six neighborhood elementary schools, stands as a necessary anchor for a walkable, stable, neighborhood-based elementary school system. And that anchor continues to be funded with our tax dollars.
Preserve Lakewood Schools believes that before dismantling the community’s investment in Grant or any other elementary school, the Board must confront the math, engage the public, and ensure that any proposed change is not just theoretically possible, but practically workable and respectful of the community’s values.
News is moving fast. Sign up to get updates directly from Preserve Lakewood Schools so you’re always in the loop. Sign Up Here!
