Bibb County presents school consolidation scenarios; board asks for more financial and transportation data

The Bibb County Board of Education on March 20 heard a district presentation exploring possible school consolidations and rezoning to address falling enrollment and underutilized facilities, with district staff and consultants presenting three consolidation scenarios and two non‑closure rezoning options for possible implementation in the 2026–27 school year.

District presenter Doctor Katika Levitt, joined by consultant Theron Plesz of Towering Your Success, said the review grew from months of data analysis, facility assessments and community engagement and was guided by principles of transparency, equity and student support. “This presentation provides a comprehensive analysis of school consolidation in our district,” Levitt said, adding the process included town halls, steering committee meetings and a November survey with 1,499 responses.

Board members were shown the district’s findings: districtwide enrollment has dropped by about 1,200 students since 2018; elementary schools account for roughly a 1,000‑student decline, middle schools about 60 students, and high schools about 470 students over the same period. The district mapped available seats by zone — Southwest about 1,080 seats, Rutland about 690, Central roughly 760, Northeast about 450, Westside about 490 and Howard about 33 — and used a seven‑factor consolidation matrix to score schools. Levitt said the matrix included enrollment trends, building utilization, per‑pupil spending, facility age, projected growth, Georgia Department of Education funding targets and presence of specialized academic programs.

From that work the district modeled three consolidation scenarios and two non‑closure scenarios: Scenario A would consolidate Hartley Elementary into Ingram Pye and Southfield; Scenario B would consolidate Williams Elementary into Ingram Pye and Hartley (with a separate rezoning alternative that would rezone part of John R. Lewis into Williams); and Scenario C would consolidate Porter Elementary into Heard (Hurd) and Skyview. Non‑closure options focused on rezoning to relieve overcrowding at some schools while keeping buildings open. Levitt emphasized that middle and high school feeder patterns would be preserved in the consolidation options.

Consultant Theron Plesz described the scoring and modeling process: “We developed data‑driven scenarios that optimize facility usage,” he said, and noted the steering committee helped narrow many initial options to the final scenarios shared with the board.

Community feedback collected at seven school‑level meetings and the district survey showed consistent themes: transportation and accessibility concerns, worries about class size and staffing, potential loss of neighborhood school identity, and mixed comfort with larger schools. Levitt summarized stakeholders’ requests for counseling services, academic supports and strong communication during any transition.

Board members pressed staff for more granular financial and operational detail. Vice president Darryl J. Morton said, “I really need data,” and asked for cost‑savings analyses that explicitly include increased transportation costs. Several trustees — including Morton, Doctor Henry C. Fickland, Kristen Hanlon and Barney Hester — questioned the April timeline for a board decision and asked for maps of proposed boundary changes, enrollment counts for specific rezoning moves, and a clearer accounting of transportation and staffing impacts.

District staff provided a few specific figures during Q&A: rezoning part of John R. Lewis to Williams would move roughly 55 to 70 students, which staff said would reduce overcrowding at John R. Lewis but would not by itself move a receiving school to the Georgia funding “450” threshold the district used in planning. Board members repeatedly asked staff to show whether proposed changes actually produce net savings after any added transportation costs and to provide clearer short‑ and long‑term financial models before voting.

Levitt told the board the steering committee reviewed and ranked scenarios and that a majority view deemed the presented options feasible. She said next steps include “finalizing recommendations for board action in April 2025, continuing community engagement as needed, and developing detailed transition plans for any schools affected by consolidation.”

Board members and staff agreed to return with more detailed appendices and cost estimates; trustees also asked for rezoning maps and more precise student counts tied to each option. No final board vote on consolidation or rezoning was taken at the March 20 meeting; the district characterized the presentation as an exploration and data‑driven recommendation phase.

The board meeting record shows broad public interest in the topic: trustees and staff discussed the scenarios for more than an hour, and several public speakers and parent representatives urged the board to account for community impacts and to preserve strong school leadership and local identity in any decision.

If the board moves forward, district staff said they intend any change to align with the district’s stated goals of maximizing student achievement, maintaining stakeholder engagement and ensuring long‑term financial sustainability. The district also said it will continue steering‑committee work and community engagement before returning with a formal recommendation.

Ending

District staff plan to return with more detailed cost, transportation and boundary information ahead of the April 2025 decision window. The consolidation exploration remains a planning effort; the board has not yet approved any closures or boundary changes.