The Salt Lake City School District Board of Education on Dec. 2 approved a package of school changes aimed at adjusting programming to district enrollment and budget realities: long‑term closure of Innovations Early College High School, reconfiguration of Nibley Park from K–8 to a K–6 elementary school, and discontinuation of the grades 4–6 magnet pilot at Washington Elementary.

Board members moved the long‑term closure of Innovations under the district’s G5 process and directed the superintendent and staff to work with the Innovations school collaboration team and school community council to design placement and transition plans for current students. Administration told the board there were 52 students in grades 9–11 enrolled at Innovations and described a proposed transition package that could include a dedicated one‑year counselor/social worker, tutoring and schedule adjustments, quarterly parent check‑ins and referrals to alternative or comprehensive high‑school programs where appropriate. The board asked staff to return with progress updates in January and February 2026 and an implementation update in January 2027.

On Nibley Park, staff and the principal told the board that current enrollment trends place the school in the high‑400s and that kindergarten enrollment (about 80 this year) supports a stable elementary population. Citing facility use and enrollment projections, the board voted to reconfigure Nibley Park to a K–6 model. Board members pressed staff on effects to dual‑language immersion and Title I funding; principals and area directors said DLI growth could be accommodated and that Title I impacts would likely be minimal.

The board also voted to discontinue the Washington magnet pilot for grades 4–6. Several board members who earlier abstained from related pilot decisions reiterated concerns that the original pilot lacked clear sustainability metrics; the board directed staff to provide more consistent annual reporting for optional specialized programs so the district can better track outcomes and budget implications.

Board members who opposed the closure of Innovations urged alternatives such as a two‑year timeline for additional recruitment or shifting the Innovations program into an existing comprehensive high school; others said declining district‑wide enrollment and the high per‑student cost of small schools made the decision necessary. The superintendent and executive directors emphasized that the district would seek to limit disruption for students, preserve as many staff positions as possible within the district and provide counseling and academic supports during transitions.

The motions carried on roll call votes recorded in the minutes; where recorded, votes are reflected in the district’s official minutes. Staff noted that detailed transition plans — including placements, counseling supports, course scheduling and possible teacher reassignments — will be brought back to the board for review and finalization.

What’s next: The board required staff to return with specifics on student placement and support options at the board’s January meeting and again in February 2026; an implementation update on establishing an Innovations program within the district was requested for January 2027.