Cave Creek USD work study weighs closing two elementary schools, moving sixth grade to curb multimillion-dollar shortfall

Cave Creek Unified School District held a work study on Jan. 28 to review the district—s budget and discuss a staff recommendation to close two elementary schools, redraw attendance boundaries and reconfigure grade levels as a way to address declining enrollment and multimillion-dollar shortfalls.

District administrators told the board that maintenance and operations (M&O) spending has been roughly $32 million annually while student enrollment has fallen, and that the district has repeatedly redirected capital (DAA) funds into operations. Administration said the district has moved about $2 million a year from capital to M&O for multiple years, totaling roughly $10 million over five years, and that capital carryforward has fallen to levels the presenters described as "very, very dangerous." The Auditor General—s report, administration said, places the district in high-risk categories tied to enrollment decline, redirected capital and the district—s change in general fund balance.

Why it matters: The administration presented projections showing capital carryforward shrinking to roughly $170,000 under current spending patterns and that continuing the present practice of transferring capital to operations could put the district into a negative capital position within a few years. Board members and staff framed the proposals as trades between structural changes (building consolidations and grade moves) and recurring cuts that would touch staffing, programs and supports.

What administrators presented - Financial position: Presenters said M&O spending has remained near $32 million while weighted average daily membership and related state funding have declined. The district reported moving about $2 million from capital to M&O each year; presenters calculated that practice has reduced capital carryforward materially and increased fiscal risk. - Projections: Using current enrollment trends and state funding formulas, staff showed a scenario in which capital carryforward declines to a few hundred thousand dollars by FY27 and could be negative by FY28 if current patterns continue. Staff modeled multiple scenarios (moderate to worst case) showing different enrollment losses and corresponding revenue-control limits. - Savings from consolidation: Staff outlined a recommended consolidation that would close two elementary campuses and rezone students into remaining schools (presenters did not record a board decision to close any campus at the work study). Using staffing and FTE allocations driven by board policy, staff estimated districtwide recurring personnel savings if the consolidation were implemented; those savings depend on which campuses are closed, how families exercise open enrollment and how many positions are left vacant or eliminated through attrition. - Special education and tuition outlays: Administrators highlighted special education tuition as a major cost driver. They reported roughly $80,000 as a typical annual cost the district pays when a student is placed outside the district, and they proposed developing an in-district specialized program (a Level C/D program) to serve some outplaced students and reduce tuition costs over time. Staff said a phased in approach could begin next school year and scale to a fuller program by Aug. 26, 2026.

Board discussion and concerns Board members pressed staff on alternatives and risks. Several trustees said closing buildings is painful and urged the administration to weigh long-term enrollment impacts and community reaction. One trustee said phased structural changes could carry less long-term harm than recurring cuts that reduce counselors, specials or reading interventions across every campus. Another trustee asked why the cabinet presented two closure options instead of three, saying a broader set of scenarios might give the board more flexibility.

Administrators said they will survey staff and families about school preferences and open-enrollment intent and that the district has scheduled a priority open-enrollment window extending through March 7 so planners can refine the expected student distribution before final decisions. Staff also said principles and principals from receiving campuses will stage open houses and transition events if consolidations proceed.

Decisions and next steps No school closures, boundary changes or grade‑reconfiguration actions were taken at the Jan. 28 work study. The session was a staff presentation and board discussion; presenters said formal action would come later if the board votes to adopt any closure or boundary plan.

Administrators and the board identified immediate next steps: surveys of families and staff to collect enrollment intent; further modeling of scenarios after the March 7 priority window; continued development of a proposed in‑district special education program; and follow-up work with facilities and outside consultants to assess repair and School Facilities Development (SFD) funding implications. The meeting adjourned with no votes on school closures.