Kyrene board reviews three closure maps that would shutter 5–8 schools; vote set for Dec. 16
Summary
Superintendent Tenius presented three closure and boundary models Dec. 9 that would close between five and eight elementary schools (and possibly two middle schools) across the Kyrene district; board members debated criteria, equity and long‑term enrollment impacts and were reminded the earliest vote is Dec. 16.
Superintendent Tenius presented the Kyrene Elementary District Governing Board with three closure and boundary proposals at a Dec. 9 study session, laying out models that would close five, six or eight elementary schools and — in some options — two middle schools.
Under the current model presented at public hearings, the district would close eight schools overall (six elementaries and two middle schools), leaving 13 elementary campuses; several closures and boundary shifts are timed across two school years (most elementary closures in 2026–27; many middle‑school changes in 2027–28). Tenius walked the board through specific campus changes in the current proposal and in two alternatives: Alternative 1 (close six schools — four elementary, two middle) and Alternative 2 (close five elementaries, no middle‑school closures). He noted some closures or mergers would be delayed to 2027–28 for operational reasons.
Tenius said the demographer and the long‑range planning committee applied criteria that prioritized regional balance and the number/percent of home‑boundary students served. He also said the committee used the district’s 40th‑day enrollment figures for FY26 as the baseline for its analysis. "Should we apply the first criteria, Kyrene de la Mariposa would be a school that comes off the closure list," he said when describing how the alternative proposals were derived.
Board members debated which model best balanced minimizing student disruption, preserving programs and meeting the district’s five‑year budget gap. President Walsh said she was not in favor of closing eight schools and told colleagues she favored the 5‑0 model (five elementary closures, no middle closures) because it better preserved the percentage of home‑boundary students served and appeared to impact almost 989 fewer students than the 4‑2 model based on the district’s fortieth‑day headcount: "I think, personally, the 5 0 model does it better," she said. Several board members urged caution, noting net budget impact depends heavily on how many families leave the district after closures; Chris Herman, the chief financial officer, said the board's five‑year target is roughly $6.7 million but that net savings vary with enrollment loss assumptions.
Members also pressed for clarity on program continuity for Kyrene Traditional Academy (KTA). Tenius said KTA would remain open for the 2026–27 year in all three models and that the district could study creating a traditional pathway at Paloma if KTA were rezoned to that campus in a later year.
Several trustees emphasized that the long‑range planning committee deliberately used a regional approach to avoid disproportionately affecting Title I or high‑need schools. Vice President Nelson and Superintendent Tenius explained that prioritizing geography and preserving a Kyrene presence across district regions produced different closure lists than a pure capacity‑or enrollment‑driven analysis; that approach, they said, was intended to avoid disparate impacts in particular neighborhoods.
The board did not vote on any maps Dec. 9. President Walsh closed the public study session by reminding trustees the earliest vote would be at the board's regular meeting on Dec. 16, and that any board member could move to adopt one of the three presented proposals at that meeting.
Next steps: staff offered to supply additional slides and enrollment/utilization data before Dec. 16, and the board reserved time for more discussion and motions at that meeting.
