Andover School Committee adopts redistricting scenario E6M5, directs phased implementation

The Andover School Committee voted to adopt a final redistricting plan labeled scenario E6M5 and directed staff to pursue a phased implementation that prioritizes kindergarten early opt‑in and legacy enrollment for specified grades.

The committee’s decision followed a presentation by Nick Stellitano of Dillinger Research and Applied Data and more than an hour of public comment and member deliberation. Stellitano told the committee the scenarios were “informed by the members of the Andover Public Schools community and staff” and were intended to balance social‑emotional considerations, building capacity, and safe walking routes.

The nut graf: The committee faces a classic school‑district trade‑off — rebalance building utilization after new elementary capacity opened in recent years while trying to preserve peer cohorts and walking zones for middle school transitions. The adopted scenario seeks to rebalance High Plain with West Elementary and to alter middle school boundaries so more students move into larger cohorts, while the committee directed staff to prioritize supports for students during transition.

Committee members and the consultant described the rationale and limits of the plan. Stellitano summarized the process and the priorities that informed the final recommendations, saying the scenarios “represent the best strategic trade offs that try to balance the needs of all Andover students.” He told the committee his team modeled utilization, transportation times and demographic data and integrated public feedback gathered since November, including more than 700 responses to an interactive mapping tool and hundreds of emails.

Public comment was strongly represented. Residents asked for clearer timelines and implementation details and pressed the committee to limit disruption for particular neighborhoods. Bob Pokris (3 Cherrywood Circle) asked whether the consultant had modeled continuing enrollment decline; he urged the district to use demographic projections that would make the plan durable through the 2030s. Nick Stellitano replied his team relied on a 2022 demographic report and district data; he asked for any competing projections to review. Several Ballardvale and High Plain parents described anxiety about their children being placed in much smaller cohorts at a different middle school, and other parents urged the committee to move quickly so families could plan.

Committee deliberations emphasized two points repeated by multiple members: (1) middle school transitions and social‑emotional supports are a top community priority, and (2) no map will make everyone satisfied, so mitigating student stress through transition programming is essential. Committee members asked the consultant to return with detailed implementation feasibility and cost estimates for the approaches the committee prioritized.

On implementation the committee directed staff to prioritize: early opt‑in for kindergarten for fiscal 2026, legacy enrollment for eighth and fifth grades for year 1 of the implementation, and to evaluate viability of a second‑year option that could be either a grade‑based legacy (fourth and seventh) or a limited geographic legacy option. The committee asked central office and the Redistricting Advisory Council to return with details and cost estimates for the phase‑in at a follow‑up meeting in the weeks ahead.

The superintendent and staff will bring back: (a) operational details for kindergarten early opt‑in, (b) the practical effects of legacy enrollment on staffing and bus routes, and (c) an analysis of whether a second‑year geographic or grade legacy is feasible within a two‑year phase‑in. The committee flagged transportation costs as a constraint; Stellitano noted some proposed boundary changes would require one or two additional buses if implemented without phase‑in, while other scenarios could be implemented by reallocating existing routes.

Ending: The committee adopted scenario E6M5 and gave staff a clear set of priorities for implementation planning. Members said they will return to the detailed implementation design at a follow‑up meeting to finalize the schedule, transportation and student‑support plans before the public notification timeline.