Redistricting commission to deliver findings; board told study examined 50 scenarios without formal recommendations

Dr. Dowling, representing the redistricting study commission, briefed the board on the commission’s work and next steps.

The commission completed nine meetings and studied more than 50 redistricting scenarios. Dr. Dowling said the forthcoming findings will summarize methodology, public input, research, and key findings but will not include recommendations. The commission used public feedback and four primary considerations — capacity/resource allocation and class sizes, minimizing student reassignment, transportation, and preserving neighborhood/community schools — together with two board priorities to guide the analysis.

Dr. Dowling acknowledged data and scope constraints: the commission relied on median distance as a proxy for ride times rather than running transportation routing on all 50 scenarios and used average cost estimates rather than a comprehensive cost analysis for each scenario. He emphasized GIS mapping as a major advance that helped the commission visualize scenario impacts and credited Dr. John Bateman for GIS work that improved analysis.

Dr. Dowling said the commission will publish its findings this spring. Board members asked whether some maps rose above others in feasibility; Dr. Dowling said the commission intentionally treated the scenarios as a sample to derive generalizable lessons rather than to single out a preferred map. Trustees discussed the possibility of requesting targeted additional analysis (e.g., pick a few scenarios for deeper cost/ride-time study) and sought training on the GIS tools used by the commission.

Next steps: commission leadership will finalize the findings and post them; the board may ask staff for additional, targeted scenario analysis or schedule a work session to review specific maps and tool training.