Manatee board launches formal rezoning phase; board debates potential school closures, teacher transfers and a new Lakewood Ranch high school

The Manatee County School Board spent its March 14 workshop moving the rezoning process from public outreach into the formal map‑drawing phase and aired a wide range of operational and programmatic concerns — from undercapacity neighborhood schools and the prospects of school closures to teacher child‑assignment policies and a proposed new high school in Lakewood Ranch.

Superintendent Dr. Wysong and staff briefed the board on the community outreach held since the board authorized the rezoning process in February. Staff reported five public meetings, an extensive set of materials on the district website (manateeschools.net/rezoningprocess), 36 direct public inputs submitted through the district’s Let’s Talk portal and prompt responses to those inquiries. Staff said they will publish a frequently asked questions document addressing common public questions and confirmed a proposed timeline that would bring three draft rezoning maps to the board and to the public for comment in late May, with an extended public input period through the summer.

Public comment: charter funding and sales tax

Public commenter Steven Zickafus urged the board to consider charter schools when planning any half‑penny sales tax that could fund school facilities, arguing taxpayers and charter students should share in facility investments. Zickafus cited statewide trends in school choice and suggested including charter schools in future facility funding to reduce district building costs; his figures were presented as examples during the public comment and attributed to his analysis.

Capacity and process details

District staff and consultants summarized the outreach and the next steps under board policy 51.20.02 (the district’s rezoning policy). Staff emphasized the process is being conducted according to the policy schedule: data review, board authorization (completed), public meetings (completed), now the map‑drawing stage. Staff said they would prepare three distinct map options for the board, run impact analyses and return with projected numbers for each option.

The board discussed several recurring topics from the public meetings: whether to close under‑capacity schools, how often rezoning should occur, grandfathering of students, and whether rezoning should produce more schools that are open to choice. Staff said annual rezoning would be infeasible and that three curated options would be easier for the board and public to evaluate. Staff also said the district’s student‑generation model used for capacity projections focused on traditional K‑12 students (and excluded charter students from the 8,253 projected traditional K‑12 growth figure cited during the presentation).

Board concerns: closures, teacher child placement and neighborhood schools

Several board members expressed strong views. One board member said she is “categorically opposed to closing schools,” citing the community harm she witnessed when a neighborhood middle school closed in prior years. Other board members pressed staff to consider operational costs tied to underused campuses (custodial, cafeteria, transportation and staffing), and urged clear analysis of the long‑term capital burden of keeping many low‑enrollment schools open.

A recurring operational question was teacher preference for bringing their children to the school where they work. Staff said the district usually accommodates employees where possible but noted edge cases exist (for example, if a school is closed to new enrollment). The board discussed policy options (for instance, prioritizing employees on a controlled open‑enrollment waiting list) but made no policy changes at the workshop.

Specific schools and program ideas discussed

Board members and staff discussed particular campuses mentioned in public comment and during the workshop: - Anna Maria Elementary: repeatedly described as well under capacity; board members urged creative program or community partnerships (the transcript includes discussion of the Guy Harvey program and a potential dock/pontoon idea for marine programming) as ways to increase use. - Harley campus: several board members cautioned against disrupting existing special‑education and early‑learning programs already located on the Harley site. Reopening Harley as a neighborhood middle school was raised as a scenario staff could model — staff said reopening would require program relocation analysis and state/contract reviews for colocated providers. - Underused West Bradenton elementary schools and the potential for marketing district successes as a non‑rezoning tool to retain neighborhood students.

Transportation, notifications and timeline

Staff said the district will prioritize communications and use the Let’s Talk system to triage parent questions. If the board approves final changes by September, staff said parent notification for school assignments could begin in October and the district could be ready for normal school‑choice windows in January. Staff stressed that construction timelines for already planned schools (for example, Rye Ranch Elementary, Lake Manatee K‑8 and Harvey North River campus) are a crucial dependency on any zone decisions.

Eighth high school at Lakewood Ranch: design, cost and scheduling

Staff presented options for a proposed eighth comprehensive high school on district‑owned property in Lakewood Ranch. The options included reusing an existing district prototype (the Parish Community layout) rather than commissioning a new single‑building prototype, to reduce design time and cost. The reuse option showed an initial phase (core facilities and one academic building) sized for about 1,250 student stations with two future building pads to expand to roughly 2,200–2,300 student stations; a three‑story future building could push capacity toward 3,000.

Estimated costs presented by staff: - Guaranteed maximum price (GMP) for a first phase (approx. 200,000 sq ft) was shown in the presentation at roughly $111 million–$115 million for construction; staff said adding architect fees, furniture/fixtures/equipment, IT and contingencies would bring a total project budget for the initial phase to about $139 million–$140 million. - A full‑build comprehensive high school option presented previously by others (single‑building prototype) had been shown at a higher figure (in staff materials and comparisons the $200 million range was discussed); staff noted the larger single‑building prototypes seen in other counties could cost materially more.

Schedule and permitting: staff recommended moving quickly because of permitting and water‑management review needs. Staff said they would seek approval to engage the project architect and proceed with site permitting; the presentation showed a schedule that would place contractor selection and GMP setting in late 2025 with a phased opening in August 2027 for the initial capacity if the board proceeded on the faster timetable. Staff also noted the Southwest Florida Water Management District filing window and the practical need to define a building footprint for permitting by early June to keep that aggressive timetable feasible.

Funding: COPS, impact fees and debt capacity

Staff briefed the board on possible funding approaches including certificates of participation (COPs) and use of impact fees. The presentation described the district’s current debt and the legal/financial levers tied to the district’s 1.5 mill capital levy; staff said the district would remain under commonly used prudent debt thresholds if it pursued the smaller, phased option but cautioned that a full larger build would require higher borrowing. Staff also noted that impact fees are uncertain (depend on unit approvals, bedroom counts and collection timing) and cannot be relied on for precise budgeting until receipts are clearer.

Program alternatives discussed by board members

Board members raised alternatives to a large comprehensive high school, including: - Creating a specialized or “polytechnical” high school (examples discussed: trades, automotive, aviation, cybersecurity, pre‑apprenticeship links to Manatee Technical College) at Bayshore or at another location with industry and post‑secondary partnerships and potential dual‑enrollment benefits. - A specialized program could be structured to attract students districtwide and thus relieve pressure on other high schools via choice, though staff cautioned about transportation and access for families living far from a single specialized site.

Next steps

Staff said they would: (1) produce three draft rezoning maps and run impact analyses; (2) post materials on the rezoning webpage and the Let’s Talk portal; (3) schedule public review meetings (staff suggested repeating the five‑meeting model used earlier); and (4) return to the board with recommended contract action for architectural/site work if the board wishes to pursue the Lakewood Ranch site on the aggressive schedule. The staff presentation included the suggestion the board consider an agenda item April 8 to authorize the architect contract so permitting could proceed in time for summer filings.

The workshop closed with a discussion about timing and tradeoffs: board members expressed differing priorities (move quickly to lock in a building window versus delay for additional data about choice and projected flows), but staff said the district needs direction soon to meet permitting windows that would support an August 2027 opening for a phased high school option.