Cuyahoga Falls board moves to close an elementary school as budget shortfall looms

The Cuyahoga Falls Board of Education voted April 23 to move forward with the closure of an elementary school as part of a series of steps officials say are necessary to address a structural budget shortfall.

The board adopted a resolution saying that “due to the financial forecast” it is moving forward with the closure of an elementary building while staff continue to gather data “to further determine the best course of action on which building.” The vote followed a detailed presentation from district financial staff laying out current and projected deficits, enrollment declines and a menu of cost-cutting options.

The move matters because the district’s five‑year forecast shows persistent gaps between revenues and spending and shrinking cash-on-hand. Treasurer Jody (Chr.) Stowe Chwick told the board that the district’s November forecast showed fiscal 2027 was projected “in the red by almost $4,000,000,” and that cash-on-hand would fall from roughly 44 days today to a negative position by 2027 unless structural changes are made. Stowe Chwick said the district and the state require the board to present a plan that brings the forecast back into balance.

Stowe Chwick and staff outlined four broad options the district has considered: closing a building, selling property, changing open-enrollment practices, and seeking additional levy revenue from voters. The treasurer said a one‑time sale of a building yields a limited, nonrecurring benefit, while the recurring savings from a closure accumulate over time.

The board was presented a per-building average savings analysis. Across six elementary buildings the district calculated roughly $3.1 million in gross annual cost reductions if a building were closed; the district’s forecast conservatively counted half of salary and benefit savings when modelling a closure (to reflect positions that cannot be eliminated entirely because of special‑education or other required services). Using that assumption, closing one elementary was shown as producing about $1.9 million in recurring improvement to the forecast in the year it would take effect.

Board members pressed staff on alternatives. Superintendent Dr. Celico said the district has been pursuing attrition, hiring freezes and other cost reductions and that these remain part of the plan. Chris Shaw, who oversees enrollment, told the board that the district is reviewing open‑enrollment placements and sibling accommodations as one way to consolidate class sections without forcing the immediate loss of full‑time teachers.

Board President Miss Coco said staff will prepare communications and that the district will notify affected families and staff promptly. Superintendent Celico said administrators will work on messaging in the next 48 hours and that principals had already been forewarned.

Votes at a glance - Resolution to move forward with closure of an elementary building (motion as amended): approved by the board on April 23, 2025. Motion text: “Be it resolved the board of education recognizes that due to the financial forecast, we hereby state we are moving forward with the closure of an elementary building while continuing to collect data to further determine the best course of action on which building.” (Motion moved by Anthony Gomez; second not specified in the minutes; outcome: approved.) - Resolution affirming Title VI compliance and replacing board policy AEA and resolution 20‑124 (required by state/federal request): adopted. (Motion and roll call recorded on the agenda; outcome: approved.) - Strategic plan goals (culture of caring; facilitating our financial future; steering to student achievement): adopted. (Outcome: approved.) - Several consent‑agenda employment contracts and memoranda of understanding, including school hires and preschool schedule MOU, were approved during the meeting (see actions list below). (Outcomes: approved as part of the superintendent/treasurer consent agendas.)

What board members said Board members acknowledged the gravity of the financial picture. Anthony Gomez, who introduced the amendment that made the motion explicit about closing a building, said the board needed to give the community clarity about the district’s direction. Several board members said they preferred to show voters that staff had already taken local steps to reduce costs before asking for new levy revenue.

What happens next Staff will continue to collect and analyse building‑level enrollment, staffing and transportation data and return recommendations to the board. The board did not pick which elementary school would close; that step will follow additional analysis, community engagement and a separate public decision process.

Clarifying details - Fiscal 2027 projected shortfall referenced in the November forecast: “almost $4,000,000” (source: Miss Stowe Chwick, treasurer presentation). - Cash-on-hand examples cited by treasurer: ~44 days currently; forecasted as low as negative 21 days in FY2027 under prior assumptions (source: Miss Stowe Chwick). - Average, per-building three‑year review savings (six elementary buildings): roughly $3,100,000 gross; district model counted half of salary and benefit savings for forecast modelling (~$1.9 million recurring) to reflect positions that would remain because of specialized services (source: Miss Stowe Chwick presentation). - Closing savings were modelled assuming closure in FY2026–27 for forecast impact (source: Treasurer presentation).

Discussion vs. decision - Discussion: The board discussed multiple options including levy timing, building sale, redistricting, open‑enrollment limits, and attrition. Staff presented enrollment trends, state budget uncertainty, and transportation and facility costs that affect net savings. - Direction: The board directed staff to continue data collection and planning with the explicit directive (adopted resolution) to move forward with closing one elementary building; staff will return with specifics before a final decision on which building to close. - Decision: The board adopted the resolution to move forward with a closure (see motion above).

Proper names and agencies referenced Cuyahoga Falls City Schools; Cuyahoga Falls High School; Ohio Department of Education (ODE); Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; Acadience (district reading assessment system as cited in presentation); Orton‑Gillingham (structured literacy approach referenced in district literacy planning); Summit County Engineer’s Office; Cuyahoga Falls Schools Foundation & Alumni Association.

Community relevance - Geographies affected: Cuyahoga Falls City (elementary‑school attendance zones). - Impact groups: students and families assigned to the elementary buildings, classroom teachers, paraprofessionals, transportation routes, special‑education caseloads. - Funding sources discussed: district general fund, state foundation funding (fair school funding formula cited), levy renewals/ new money, federal/state literacy grants (separately discussed in literacy presentation).