Portland Public Schools staff and the districts attendance boundary committee presented draft elementary and middle school boundary scenarios and a timeline for community feedback, saying any board action would come after an implementation plan and further engagement.

The committee, created by a June 2024 board resolution, has been meeting for nearly a year and used an external demographer, McKay Larrabee of MGT, to model how proposed boundary shifts would affect enrollment now and in five and 10 years. "Functional capacity" (classroom capacity set aside for arts, gym, special education), "resident students" (students living in Portland), "utilization" (rostered resident students divided by functional capacity) and the districts measure of "economically disadvantaged" (household income at or below 185% of the federal poverty level) were presented as the committees working definitions.

Staff and committee members emphasized the tension between equalizing utilization and addressing socioeconomic imbalance. The presenter said scenarios can change utilization more easily than socioeconomic composition because neighborhood housing patterns drive poverty measures. Committee priorities guiding map changes are utilization, socioeconomic demographics, neighborhood schools, transportation effects and minimizing overall student disruption.

The boundary group reviewed multiple scenarios and said it modified a favored map (referred to in committee materials as scenario 6) after considering community feedback and demographic projections. The presenter said the committee will hold a second round of community engagement in October, with sessions the presenter believed were scheduled for Oct. 15, 16, 29 and 30, and that the committee anticipates submitting recommendations to the board in November. "There are no changes to boundaries for the 2025-26 school year," the presenter said, and said implementation planning (for example, whether fourth graders remain at their current school for fifth grade and how siblings are treated) would be developed after community feedback.

Committee members and board members noted the technical work MGT does to adjust "study areas" at street level during meetings, and that the process must balance going slowly to get details right while moving quickly enough to allow budget planning for the next school year. The presenter emphasized that recommendations, if any, would include an implementation plan addressing transportation, sibling placement, and phased sequencing of elementary and middle school changes.

The committee said it is not proposing boundary changes for Peaks Island or Cliff Island because their contexts differ from mainland elementary schools. Staff also noted the importance of coordinating with city officials about pending housing developments that could materially change enrollment in particular neighborhoods.

Next steps listed by staff were: finalize draft middle school scenarios this week, run five- and 10-year enrollment projections against draft maps, hold the October community sessions, develop an implementation plan beginning immediately after the October meetings, and deliver a formal recommendation to the board, likely in November, to enable any budget implications to be addressed in the winter budget cycle.