Portland school board adopts draft “ABCs” work plan, prioritizes Albina projects, boundaries and budget

The Portland Public Schools Board of Education opened a July work session to begin shaping a one-year work plan focused on a short list of priorities, with members and Superintendent Dr. Armstrong outlining seven areas for the 2025–26 school year and scheduling follow-up meetings before an Aug. 19 retreat. The board did not take formal action at the work session.

Board Chair said the goal was to “focus on 3 things” well rather than spread attention across many items, and she framed staff and board work under a compact, alphabetized list intended to guide the year. Superintendent Dr. Armstrong presented the district’s draft priorities and asked the board to weigh in on the items and the proposed framing.

The draft work plan — presented by Dr. Armstrong as items a through e — lists seven priority clusters: the Albina projects (including building relocations, Jefferson High School, Tubman and the Center for Black Student Excellence); a districtwide boundaries and enrollment framework with emphasis on community voice; a strategic budget approach and “proactive” reductions; labor bargaining preparations; construction program transparency and faster timelines; the district improvement plan (academic goals and metrics); and “excellence in service,” a cultural and operational improvement focus. Dr. Armstrong said her expectation is to have “a clear timeline of the action steps and the decision points along the way” and for “progress on all of those projects, if not complete by June 2026.”

Board members asked for clarifications on several points. Director DePass and other members urged that academic measures — described elsewhere by staff as the district’s monitoring goals (third-grade reading, fifth-grade math and eighth-grade readiness) — be clearly tied into the work plan so progress on achievement remains visible. One board member recommended adding a high school graduation or postsecondary-readiness metric to the monitoring set.

Several directors raised operational concerns that staff said the work plan should capture: teacher absenteeism and unfilled substitute positions in the district’s hardest-to-staff schools; contracts with culturally specific partners and an annual report to the board on partner performance; and the need for a budget education series so newer board members can follow fiscal discussions. Dr. Armstrong and staff said substitute spending and early data show partial improvements and that metrics and updates can be folded into committee reports.

Members also flagged internal governance language in the draft, specifically items referring to “board leadership working with the superintendent to determine what follow-up is needed” after audits. Several directors said that phrasing could conflict with the audit committee’s charter and requested clearer protocol language to preserve committee roles. The board chair acknowledged the concern and said protocol language and roles will be reviewed at the planned Aug. 19 retreat.

Board members and staff agreed the work plan is a living document. The superintendent said staff will revise the draft to reflect board feedback and circulate a cleaned-up version; the group discussed continuing the conversation at the Aug. 5 regular meeting and at the Aug. 19 retreat, where board protocols and committee responsibilities will be a focus. No motions or formal votes occurred during the session.

The discussion underscored central constraints noted by both board and staff: a multimillion-dollar projected budget gap, major bond and construction projects already underway, and multiple open labor contracts that make bargaining preparation a near-term priority. Several directors described the heavy workload ahead and urged reliance on committee work to avoid duplicative requests that could bog down staff.

The board chair and Dr. Armstrong closed the session by asking directors for any further edits; staff committed to circulating a revised draft “this week” or “next week” and to follow up individually with board members. The board will revisit the draft and schedule committee work and informational presentations that fit the ABCs framework before formal adoption or a public vote later in the year.