Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

McPherson board adopts long-range facility plan, sets March bond and votes to reconfigure elementary schools

December 09, 2025 | McPherson, School Boards, Kansas


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

McPherson board adopts long-range facility plan, sets March bond and votes to reconfigure elementary schools
The McPherson Unified School District board voted to adopt a long-range facility plan, set a March bond election with two ballot questions and approve the transition from four to three elementary schools, designating Eisenhower Elementary for preparation as a future middle school.

The plan and related ballot language were presented to the board after two consultant briefings: Dr. Tomlinson of Excellence K-12 reviewed survey results and outreach implications, and Kristen Nevegette summarized community input gathered through a ThoughtExchange process. Dr. Tomlinson said his team collected 550 completed surveys and saw the strongest support for a no-tax-increase option. "I believe you had around $60,000,000 ballpark for that no tax increase," Tomlinson said, adding that tax-increase options would require a focused campaign and follow-up communication.

Nevegette, who led the district's ThoughtExchange, told the board that 832 people participated and that ThoughtExchange collected 701 "thoughts" which were rated by participants. "The more people who participate in the ThoughtExchange, the more likely this is going to reflect the ideas and opinions of your community," she said, and identified safety and security, educational quality/class size, transparency/communication, facility condition, and financial responsibility as the top themes.

Board members emphasized that the ballot language for the March special election is intentionally structured as two questions: question 2 is contingent on question 1. Staff explained the contingency to the board and noted the practical reasons for a March special election, including budgeting for the next fiscal year if the bond passes. The board adopted a resolution calling the bond election and setting the ballot language; the resolution was approved by roll call with all named members recorded as voting yes.

On the long-range facility plan itself, district staff and consultants presented consolidation scenarios and proposed site and floor plans for a renovated high school that would retain the PAC and roundhouse while adding classroom, commons and secure-entry space. The presentation included cost ranges: staff cited a smaller, no-tax-increase package in the $62.5 million range and larger scenarios in the roughly $105–$110 million range. The board approved the long-range facility plan as presented by a unanimous vote, 7–0.

The board also approved a motion to transition from four elementary schools to three beginning in the 2026–27 school year and to designate Eisenhower Elementary to be transitioned and prepared for reconfiguration as a future middle school, citing projected operational savings and enrollment capacity planning. The motion passed with a recorded tally of 5 yes, 1 no and 1 abstention; board members explained the vote reflected a balance between financial sustainability and community concerns about individual school identities.

Board members and consultants repeatedly flagged communication as a priority going forward. Tomlinson and Nevegette urged the district to "circle back" to the community after engagement activities with clear, accessible messaging about costs and benefits — for example, translating bond impacts into estimated costs per household — and to involve teachers and staff as trusted messengers. Nevegette said the ThoughtExchange report will be available online and staff will distribute the link to participants and the broader community.

Next steps noted by district staff included submitting required documentation to the State Board of Education and returning to the board with details on the cost of conducting a March special election; staff said they would provide that information at the board's next meeting. The board also approved a motion to go into an executive session to discuss proposals in teacher contract negotiations under the Kansas Open Meetings Act.

Actions taken at the meeting are formal and procedural: adoption of the long-range plan, adoption of the bond resolution to set the March election and ballot language, approval to transition elementary configurations, and authorization of an executive session to discuss labor negotiations. The board and consulting team said additional design, cost and communication work will follow before any bond would appear on a ballot.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep Kansas articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI