Consultants present attendance-zone scenarios and capacity data; no closures decided

ITRI/ORED planners presented a land‑use and enrollment analysis to the Craven County Board of Education, showing 39 pending developments that could add more than 4,000 housing units and a 10‑year membership forecast that projects modest declines in most grade levels. Thomas Dudley, a school planner with ITRI, said the study produced two elementary redistricting scenarios tied to the potential closure of Barton (transcript label: "Grama Barton"). The first scenario would reassign parts of Barton’s attendance zone to Havelock and Edwards, using U.S. 70 as a natural boundary; a second, wider scenario would include Brinson to unlock additional capacity and provide more flexibility.

Dudley and Matthew Palmer (director of School Camp, an NC State planning practice) said they relied on the 2019 district facility study for school capacity figures and that their work did not include building walk‑throughs. Palmer explained the distinction between architectural/ADM capacity (the maximum seat count) and operational capacity, which is reduced to reflect program needs, pre‑K classrooms and class‑size overlays required by HB 90. "These capacities that you see here are lower than the absolute number of seats," Palmer said, explaining why a school listed as 360 seats in one table shows 312 as its operational capacity under the Smith Senate calculations.

Board member Mason criticized the scope and the choice of schools in the scenarios, saying the board needs a "3, 5 and 10 year strategic plan" and questioning why the study focused on Havelock rather than New Bern. "We're picking an easy quick win," Mason said, urging staff to revisit the capacity numbers and the assumptions used in the analysis. Dudley and Blunt (district staff) responded that Havelock was modeled first because multiple under‑capacity elementary schools are in close proximity, which would minimize transportation impacts and operational disruption; they emphasized the presentation was informational and that no formal closure process under North Carolina Department of Public Instruction rules has begun.

Board members asked for follow‑up: permit pull dates for the 39 developments, a clearer breakdown of which capacity figure (ADM vs. operational) was used per school, and staff estimates of likely cost savings and relocation costs if a closure were pursued. Several board members said they were wary of moving students into temporary classroom trailers and asked for concrete dollar estimates of net savings. Dudley said the team would share notes and the high‑resolution maps attached to the board materials for deeper review.

On middle schools, ITRI said the proposed consolidation that created Freedom Middle School is viable and that they do not foresee near‑capacity pressures in the foreseeable future. The board did not vote on any closure or redistricting action; members directed staff and the consultants to supply additional data, validate capacity assumptions, and return with more detailed financial and operational analyses to inform any future recommendation.