Pittsburgh Public Schools presents updated facilities feasibility plan, board to consider opening public comment period in June

PITTSBURGH — Pittsburgh Public Schools Superintendent Dr. Wayne Walters presented an updated feasibility report to the school board and community that recommends consolidating underused schools, reconfiguring grade bands and realigning attendance zones to concentrate capital investments and expand instructional offerings.

The report, which district staff revised after public hearings and neighborhood feedback, recommends keeping some schools originally proposed for closure while moving others, shifting magnet and specialty programs, expanding English language development centers and closing a central gifted center to deliver gifted services at students’ home schools. Walters said the plan is grounded in enrollment projections, facility assessments and more than a year of community engagement: “This updated feasibility report rooted in deep analysis reflects our commitment to advancing equity, excellence, and efficiency.”

District leaders told the board the plan is intended to free funds now devoted to basic upkeep so the district can modernize fewer, better‑equipped schools and expand curricular offerings such as world languages, arts and career exploration. Chief Financial Officer Ronald Joseph said the district projects a 2025 operating deficit of approximately $28.1 million and presented estimated budget impacts and capital costs: the district currently spends about $40 million annually on basic building upkeep, plans $69 million in capital maintenance over seven years for retained schools and anticipates additional renovation investments. Joseph said the consolidated portfolio could lead to multi‑million‑dollar annual transportation savings and a seven‑year cost avoidance estimate tied to closures and reinvestment.

The report includes specific program and facility proposals. Educational Resource Strategies (ERS), the consultant, initially proposed closing multiple sites; the updated plan retains Roosevelt and relocates Schiller’s middle‑school STEM program into the Allegheny facility on the North Side. The district recommends moving Pittsburgh Montessori’s magnet program to Linden, shifting Pittsburgh Online Academy to the Greenway facility, adding English language development centers from 11 to 17, and serving gifted K–8 students at their home schools with a district‑wide screener and expanded teacher training.

Chief Academic Officer (interim) Dr. Sean McNeal described instructional changes intended to accompany reconfiguration: consistent K–5 instructional blocks, house models and advisory periods for middle schools, expanded access to music, art and world languages, teacher centers offering six‑week coaching cycles, and a districtwide “win time” for targeted interventions. McNeal said the gifted model will move to school‑based services and that the district will use the Naglieri nonverbal ability test screener in second grade to identify students for tier‑2 enrichment.

Chief Operations Officer Mike McNamara discussed facility and transportation implications. He said the district now has 24 air‑conditioned buildings and 22 without air conditioning and that strategic consolidation could expand air conditioning to more sites. McNamara said PPS transports roughly 17,000 students daily and estimated annual pupil‑transportation savings of about $5.5 million if magnet‑to‑neighborhood shifts and consolidations proceed. He said the district will coordinate with Pittsburgh Regional Transit on route planning and interim routing solutions.

Ebony Pugh, director of public relations and media content, described a phased community engagement and implementation timeline. If the board approves opening the state‑required public comment period (the board was asked to vote on doing so in June), officials plan mandatory public hearings and an extensive phase of targeted communications and transition planning. The district outlined a phased schedule that begins with major moves in June 2026 to prepare for the 2026–27 school year, continued transitions through 2027–29 and a final proposed portfolio of approximately 44 schools (24 elementary, eight middle, one 6–12, seven high schools, four special schools and one center program), noting the plan does not finalize attendance zones or all program placements.

Board members asked detailed implementation questions during discussion: how the district will staff expanded arts, world language and STEM offerings; how it will maintain services for students with exceptionalities and English learners; whether teacher vacancies and recruitment plans can support planned teacher centers and schedule coverage; and how the district will prevent inequitable outcomes during transitions. Director Silk asked about the timing of the presentation amid public discussion; Walters responded that the district intended a late‑May presentation and said scheduling reflected staff availability at the end of the year. Several directors urged stronger community outreach, including door‑to‑door canvassing and targeted engagement for families who are hard to reach.

No formal board vote on the feasibility plan or on closures occurred at the meeting. District staff said the board will be asked next month to vote to open the public‑comment period (if the board approves, the district plans the public comment window from July through September and subsequent mandatory hearings). Walters characterized the plan as “a generational opportunity” and urged community engagement: “We are not closing schools, we are opening new pathways. We’re not eliminating programs, we’re expanding possibilities.”

Implementation steps described by the district include conducting final attendance‑zone work (done in‑house by the Office of Data, Research, Evaluation and Assessment), phased building renovations and capital investments, repurposing or disposition of closed properties following board policy and the Pennsylvania School Code, and hiring or assigning transition leads and parent ambassadors to support families.

Board members requested more detail on special education regional services, replacement teacher plans to cover professional learning, and plans for community‑use of closed sites. District staff repeatedly said some implementation specifics depend on final board decisions and student needs for particular school years. Pugh said the district will add a “Find My School” mock tool to the website during the public comment phase so families can preview proposed feeder patterns.

What’s next: the administration asked the board to place a vote to open the state‑required public comment period on the June agenda. If the board approves that vote, the district will begin a public comment and hearings process followed by additional board votes on final recommendations, attendance zones and phase‑in schedules.

(Quotes and attributions used in this article come from the board presentation and subsequent board discussion during the Pittsburgh Public Schools board meeting.)