Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and teachers urge Orange Unified not to close Imperial Elementary; board asks staff for more data
Summary
Dozens of public commenters, many from Imperial Elementary, urged the board to preserve the small school and its special‑education supports; trustees asked staff for detailed feasibility and capacity analyses before wider surveys or votes.
During public comment at the June 18 Orange Unified Board study session, more than a dozen parents, teachers and community members spoke about proposed consolidation options that could affect Imperial Elementary and other neighborhood schools.
Multiple Imperial teachers and parents described the school as a close‑knit community with specialized supports for students with disabilities and strong ties to Canyon High School. One commenter, who identified herself as a parent and federal government attorney, said, "Please don't close Imperial Elementary School," and warned that special education continuity and staff relationships would be difficult to replicate at a larger receiving campus.
Another Imperial teacher and parent said staff and families fear decisions have been pre‑made, telling trustees, "Imperial is what we do well," and urged the board to consider how consolidation would affect programs such as SCC classes and partnerships with nearby high schools. Speakers also raised safety concerns tied to road access and emergency response in hilly neighborhoods if students were moved to larger campuses.
Other commenters, including a teacher-union representative who served on the consolidation committee, supported consolidation as a way to reduce combo classes, add staff and build more robust programs. Committee members and staff said consolidation proposals were developed with a focus on program enhancement and that some campuses could be better positioned for modernization and state matching funds if enrollment were concentrated.
Trustees acknowledged the strong emotions in the room and said they wanted more school‑level detail before launching widespread surveys or taking formal steps: board members asked for worst‑case demographic projections, explicit counts of available teaching stations and program set‑asides, staffing formulas to show how counselors and psychologists would be assigned, and clarity about program designations that do not automatically transfer to a new site (for example, AVID showcase status would need requalification). The board left the matter open and requested staff return with the requested analyses.
