School board approves boundary change moving planned homes into Dixie cone site despite parent objections

The Washington County School District board voted unanimously Dec. 9 to adopt a boundary change that will assign students living south of Enterprise Drive and parts east of I‑15 to the Dixie cone site beginning in August 2025. Superintendent Dr. Esplin outlined the affected streets and neighborhoods and said families with students currently in grades 6–12 would be allowed to remain in the Desert Hills boundary, but that no bus transportation would be provided for those who choose to stay.

The district’s proposal covers an industrial-park area south of Enterprise Drive, then along River Road west to the Southern Parkway and west to I‑15, and a developed area east of I‑15 toward the Arizona border. “Students living in this area would attend the Dixie cone site beginning in August 2025,” Dr. Esplin said during the public hearing presentation.

At the public meeting, parent Patty Johnson asked whether the board had already decided and said moving students would take “your kid from a very good school, put it in an average to below average school.” The board chair responded that the meeting was an opportunity for public comment and that a final decision was made at the roll-call vote. A motion to approve the boundary change was moved by Member Sigmiller and seconded by Member Hutchinson; a roll-call vote was conducted and the motion passed unanimously.

The board and district officials framed the change as a way to create growth capacity for the Dixie cone site and to rebalance enrollment across landlocked neighborhoods. Member (speaker 2) argued the plan “provides the Dixie cone site with some growth areas” and acknowledged it will cause “growing pains” but described the move as necessary for future balance.

The district noted an option for students in grades 6–12 to remain at Desert Hills without district-provided buses; the absence of transportation was a central concern in public remarks. The board said it takes public comments into account but proceeded with the approved motion at the same meeting. No changes to the motion were recorded at the meeting.