Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Start Times topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Start‑time committee reports broad participation and aims to deliver recommendation March 18
Summary
A start‑time committee of about 80 volunteers, including nine students, has met multiple times and will present school start‑time recommendations to the board March 18 after reviewing research, transportation constraints and community survey results.
Get email alerts on the School Start Times topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A district committee convened to evaluate school start times reported strong community participation and an expedited schedule to deliver recommendations to the board by March 18.
Jacob Eisen, a parent volunteer serving on the committee, told the board more than 80 people applied to participate and the group has averaged about 70 attendees per meeting. The committee includes parents, staff and nine students from Elmbrook’s high and middle schools. Meetings to date have focused on sleep research and position statements, complications tied to busing and extracurriculars, and development of a district survey to gather broader public feedback.
Eisen said committee meetings have included two‑hour facilitated sessions with table work and follow‑up small teams that review discussion outcomes. “We’ve averaged about 70 individuals per meeting since then,” he said, and the group is preparing scenario options for the board’s consideration. Committee members flagged logistical challenges tied to Elmbrook’s three‑tiered bus schedule, childcare needs, athletics and hazardous‑walk zones; the committee intends to present model options and note where costs or policy changes would be required.
The committee’s timeline calls for finalizing start‑time proposals and any associated policy changes or impact analyses at the next meetings, releasing a district survey to collect community input, and presenting a recommendation to the board on March 18. District staff told the board that some operational steps — for example, walk‑zone or traffic studies — may be necessary before the board can act, and that full cost estimates could follow committee recommendations.
Board members praised the committee’s engagement and process; no formal board vote was requested at the Feb. 11 meeting.

