Sumter board approves 2026–27 realignment timeline after heated debate
Summary
After extended debate and a failed substitute motion to delay, the Sumter School District Board of Trustees approved a timeline to implement school realignment for the 2026–27 school year; opponents urged waiting for the master plan and cited declining enrollment.
The Sumter School District Board of Trustees voted May 19 to approve a realignment timeline for the 2026–27 school year after a lengthy, at times contentious debate about timing, cost and demographic trends.
Board members discussed the realignment plan at length. Dr. Kenny, a longtime trustee, urged postponement and proposed a substitute motion to continue the realignment until the district’s master plan is developed and adopted. He argued the plan is “obsolete” in places, does not reflect recent enrollment declines, and risks committing the district to expensive building and operations decisions that could conflict with a forthcoming master plan. “The master plan should be the engine that drives realignment,” Dr. Kenny said.
Other trustees said the realignment would help transportation and rural-area efficiency and voiced support for moving ahead. After the substitute motion to continue until the master plan was developed failed, trustees voted to approve the realignment timeline; the chair announced the motion “passes at this time.”
The board record shows the issue drew multiple public and member comments during the action-items portion of the meeting. Trustees discussed enrollment figures presented by the administration: district enrollment has fallen in recent years from 15,473 in 2021 to 13,654 in 2025, a decline trustees said should inform any long-term capital decisions. Opponents said the district has nearly half its seats empty in aggregate and that the realignment could solidify inefficiencies. Proponents said consolidation would reduce duplicated bus routes and help operations.
The board’s motion approved the timeline as presented; the administration was directed to continue implementation according to the approved schedule. No detailed cost estimate or implementation budget was adopted during the vote; trustees opposed to the timeline asked for further analysis and for the master plan to guide longer-term capital decisions.
The vote concluded with procedural disputes at the dais; board leadership moved forward after a failed attempt to substitute and a short interruption of the meeting’s decorum. The record does not include a roll-call vote count in the public transcript for the final motion.
