Board directs superintendent to activate school-naming committee for selected consolidation and reconfiguration projects; debate over carrying forward legacy ­‑

The Washoe County School District Board of Trustees voted 5–2 on Aug. 26 to direct the superintendent to activate the district’s School Naming Committee under Board Policy 71.10 for projects described as scenario 2 and scenario 3 in the district’s Facilities Modernization Plan (FMP).

Chief Operations Officer Adam Searcy and Chief Communications Officer Michelle Anderson presented five scenarios that align with the FMP and recommended activating the naming committee when a new school is built on an existing site with changes to grade configuration (scenario 2) and when a new school is built on a nearby site with changes to grade configuration (scenario 3). Anderson said a spring activation would allow the committee to prepare for a school opening in the 2028–29 school year and to coordinate with zoning timelines.

Searcy told trustees that the naming committee’s terms had expired and the committee has been dormant while the capital program shifted from building new schools to modernizing existing facilities. He said reactivating the committee would follow the district’s recruitment and appointment process, would be subject to open-meeting requirements, and would operate with two‑year terms aligned to the capital program schedule. “We would not seek to meet just to meet,” Searcy said; the committee would work “in rhythm or in support of the capital program.”

Trustees debated a related but separate proposal to direct the superintendent to bring forward options preserving the names of schools slated for closure or consolidation (for example, retaining a namesake on an athletic field or family resource center). Several trustees, including Trustee Woodley and President Smith, argued for an explicit board directive so communities facing closures would have assurance that names and legacies would be retained in some form; others said that practice historically has been managed by staff and could be handled later or by amending board policy. Trustees ultimately did not adopt an additional directive on legacy names at this meeting.

The motion that passed directs the superintendent to activate the naming committee for scenario 2 and scenario 3 projects in the FMP. Board counsel and staff noted that the board retains sole authority under Board Policy 71.10 and Administrative Regulation 71.11 to name portions of school facilities or other district property (for example athletic fields, family resource centers or gymnasiums).

Trustees debated timeline and scope at length. Trustee Hall, who moved the motion, said the committee would be used selectively and that most FMP projects fall into other scenarios that would not trigger the full naming committee. Trustee Nicollet seconded. The motion carried 5–2.

What happened next: staff will proceed with recruitment and appointment steps for the naming committee, align committee work with capital project timelines and present recommendations to the board where Board Policy 71.10 gives the board naming authority. The separate question of a board-level directive to ensure legacy names are carried forward was left for future discussion.