The Winona Area Public School District board spent the bulk of the meeting on a briefing about an elementary reconfiguration proposal, survey results and attendance-boundary options that trustees will vote on at the December 19 meeting.

Staff summarized three elements: updated facility plans, survey analysis from 703 responses, and attendance-boundary options. Facilities consultant Paul Apakowski outlined lower-cost alternatives — for example, renovating only the Jefferson pod’s bathrooms (~$170,000–$210,000) rather than a full pod rebuild — and sketched an option for Goodview that would enclose classroom “pods” and add restrooms, a project staff estimated at a budgetary range in the low millions.

John Casper and other staff reviewed the district survey: of 703 total responses, about 17.4% said they were strongly in favor of the current proposal and roughly 51% said they were strongly opposed. Staff said narrative answers were thematically analyzed (AI-assisted) into 10 key takeaways: supporters cited resource consolidation and equity; opponents raised concerns about student transitions, transportation, splitting siblings, staff and special-education impacts, and community resistance.

Superintendent Brzezinski and transportation staff presented maps of current attendance areas and student residences. As a potential path to balance enrollments, staff suggested relocating the Rios program (grades 1–4, roughly 120 students) from Jefferson to WK; Jefferson would then adopt the entirety of the current Goodview attendance area (about 145 students in grades 1–4), producing a net shift intended to even class sections across buildings.

Directors probed operational details — capacity at WK with preschool remaining there, square footage differences between Goodview and WK classrooms, bus-route implications, and the April 1 policy deadline for announcing attendance-area changes. Several directors emphasized the process’ long history of public debate and urged the board to weigh the trade-offs of making a disruptive but stabilizing decision versus continuing deliberation.

Public comment earlier in the meeting included an individual who said pulling children from neighborhood schools would be disruptive and questioned whether the plan would produce real savings.

What’s next: staff will present additional clarifying data at the next meetings and the board is scheduled to vote on the reconfiguration motion on Dec. 19; a community listening session is planned before that vote.