Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Start Times Vote topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Shippensburg board rejects proposed later start times after public opposition and split debate
Summary
The board voted 7–1 against an administration proposal to shift school start times in 2025–26; the motion was moved by Dr. Michael Lyman and failed after public comment and debate about instructional minutes, teacher planning time and community impact.
The Shippensburg Area School District board on Feb. 24 voted down a proposed change to school start times for the 2025–26 school year, after public comment and extended board discussion.
Administration proposed new start times that would have moved elementary start times into the 9:10–9:15 a.m. range and set secondary start times at 8:05 a.m. for both the high school and middle school. The schedule read aloud by administration listed the following proposed starts: Shippensburg Area Senior High School and Shippensburg Area Middle School at 8:05 a.m.; Nancy Grayson Elementary at 9:15 a.m.; James Byrd Elementary at 9:10 a.m.; Shippensburg Area Intermediate School at 9:25 a.m.; and Grace B. Luhrs at 9:15 a.m.
Doctor Michael Lyman moved the recommendation and Levi Kressler seconded. During the board roll call, Lyman cast the lone “yes.” The tally was: Jim Bard — No; Mike Carey — No; Levi Kressler — No; Michael Lyman — Yes; Kurt Noggle — No; Fred Scott — No; Darren Donovan — No; Stephanie Eberly — No. The motion failed (7 no, 1 yes).
Public comment before the vote reflected community resistance. Several parents and residents told the board a later start would reduce instructional minutes for younger students, likely by cutting specials such as music, and would harm families’ routines. Two community speakers who had attended a public session said the forum’s attendees were overwhelmingly opposed, and a resident who identified herself from Southampton Township urged the board to quantify the financial implications of stadium parking and other projects before approving schedule changes that affect the budget.
Board members debated tradeoffs between teacher planning time and lost instructional minutes. Administration noted the teacher workday (7.5 hours) would remain unchanged under the proposed schedule and that the change would increase common planning time for many secondary teachers; administrators warned that if the schedule were rejected, securing additional planning time could require hiring more personnel depending on contract negotiations.
Ending: With the board’s 7–1 vote against the proposal, the district will keep current start times for 2025–26 unless the board later brings a different schedule forward. Board members asked administration and the outreach committee to keep engaging the community on school scheduling and teacher planning needs.
