Superintendent Ryan Aslan told the Corvallis School Board on Oct. 30 that the district needs structural changes to address declining enrollment and a budget shortfall, and presented a revised consolidation proposal that would close Leticia Carson Elementary and reassign its students to Mountain View, Catherine Jones Harrison and Bessie Coleman.

The revised plan, which staff said was developed after four community listening sessions and an enrollment and demographic study, is projected to reduce district spending by about $3.0 million for 2026–27, compared with a roughly $1.87 million reduction under an earlier option. District staff told the board the district faces about a $4.0 million shortfall for 2026–27 and that projected revenue and enrollment trends could produce much larger gaps in subsequent years unless structural changes are made.

Why it matters: The district’s basic school funding in Oregon is driven by enrollment. Staff said concentrating students on fewer sites can preserve specialist positions (music, art, library), reduce the number of blended classrooms and increase opportunities at individual sites. The proposal would also reconfigure middle‑grade programming to a junior‑high (7–8) model and adopt K–4, 5–6 and 7–8 grade bands intended to increase course specialization and pathway development.

What district staff presented: Finance Director Lauren Wolf described the modeling assumptions: staffing allocations by flat positions (for example one principal per school), formulas for assistants (example: one general education assistant per 75 students), and the use of the district’s current staffing cost averages so the model could be compared “apples to apples” with the 2025–26 budget. The district also cited a third‑party demographic study and city/county housing data used to forecast enrollment.

Superintendent Aslan framed the change as difficult but necessary. "This is an example of something we've seen a few times, but I think it's important to note," he said while presenting historical enrollment trends and prior school openings and closures.

Board questions and staff clarifications: Board members pressed staff on alternatives: further boundary adjustments, shifting different schools, feasibility of moving specialized life‑skills programming, and transportation impacts. Staff said some modeled closure options (for example, closing Catherine Jones Harrison or Adams) would create classroom or capacity shortfalls under current building layouts. The district estimated that converting or upgrading life‑skills facilities at another school could cost on the order of a million dollars or more.

Community reaction and public comment: The meeting drew an unusually large public turnout for public comment. Dozens of speakers — parents, staff and students — urged the board to slow the timetable, produce side‑by‑side operating cost comparisons for each school, and pursue an external, independent review of the options. Susanna Davis, a parent and research scientist, said, “The proposal lacks the necessary financial and equity analyses to justify closing a neighborhood Title I school that serves many low‑income and historically marginalized families.”

Several students from Leticia Carson Elementary also spoke. Fourth‑grader Odin said, “Please don’t close Leticia Carson,” and several student speakers described the school as a community hub and asked the board to preserve stable, walkable neighborhood schooling.

Board next steps: Board members said they want more time to deliberate. Several directors asked staff for a short, focused list of additional information the board needs (capacity tables and an apples‑to‑apples marginal financial comparison of the initial and revised proposals using the most recent enrollment). Leadership agreed to arrange a follow‑up meeting and to work with staff on the scope and feasibility of external review, if the board directs it. The board did not vote on the consolidation at this meeting.

What is not in this report: The revised proposal incorporates demographic projections through January 2025 and does not include potential state or federal funding reductions that may be announced in the November revenue forecast; staff said any larger funding change would require additional adjustments during the formal budget process.

Where this came from: The proposal and numbers were presented by Superintendent Ryan Aslan, Finance Director Lauren Wolf and Assistant Superintendent Melissa Harder, and Director of Student Growth Byron Betheros. Dozens of public commenters and multiple board members questioned or supported elements of the plan during the public comment period.

What to watch for next: The board scheduled follow‑up deliberation and asked staff to provide a capacity summary and an updated marginal financial comparison of the previous and revised proposals using the most recent enrollment counts. The board also indicated it will monitor the November state revenue forecast and may revisit assumptions depending on that outcome.