District staff proposes boundary committee, strategic plan and staged long‑range facilities work

District administrators told the Newberg School District board on April 22 that the district’s last long‑range facility plan, completed around January 2019, is now outdated and needs multi-stage work: boundary review, strategic planning, then a refreshed long‑range facilities analysis tied to any future bond planning.

Interim Superintendent Dave (identified in the meeting as interim superintendent) said the plan should knit together three long‑term elements: a refreshed teaching and learning vision and strategic plan, a facility‑condition and replacement forecast (buildings are modeled over a 75–100 year life span) and enrollment/capacity forecasting. The plan in the packet used forecasts from 2018–2019 that substantially overstated enrollment: the earlier forecast predicted roughly a 200‑pupil increase while actual enrollment is about 1,000 students lower than that projection, staff said.

Administrators recommended a sequence: (1) run a boundary committee next fall including staff, parents and community members to examine neighborhood assignments and balance school utilization; (2) start a district strategic planning process in spring to refresh mission, vision and priorities; and (3) commission a formal long‑range facility plan and enrollment study (often using outside demographers) once boundaries and strategic priorities are clearer. Several board members supported the phased approach and emphasized thorough community engagement and caution about hasty school closures.

Board members also discussed staffing and operating cost implications of multiple small schools, and noted the boundary committee work can take several months to years depending on community discussion. Directors asked whether enrollment forecasting would account for new housing permitting; staff said enrollment studies typically incorporate city permitting and apply household‑to‑student conversion ratios, but noted those ratios have changed in recent years and an expert study will be used.

Superintendent Dave raised one implementation concern: his current contract runs through June 30, 2026, and several directors recommended the board consider whether to extend his contract to preserve continuity for multi‑year projects such as boundary work and a long‑range facility plan. Directors said they plan to discuss that timeline with legal counsel and bring a board decision forward by June if they choose to seek an extension.

Why it matters: The boundary, strategic‑planning and facility processes determine where students attend, how buildings are sized and whether the district will propose a bond for construction or modernization. Directors emphasized engaging parents and staff, balancing enrollment across schools, and avoiding abrupt changes that would disrupt students and teachers.