Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Closure Consolidation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, students urge Pasadena Unified board not to close neighborhood schools
Summary
Dozens of parents, students and teachers told the Pasadena Unified School District board that proposed consolidations — including possible closures affecting Marshall, Blair and Don Benito — would destabilize students, remove unique programs and harm communities still recovering from fire and pandemic trauma.
Dozens of parents, students and teachers told the Pasadena Unified School District board on Monday that proposed school consolidations would harm students and communities.
At a packed public‑comment session, speakers said Marshall, Blair and Don Benito serve as community anchors and provide stability, wrap‑around supports and unique academic programs such as IB and dual‑enrollment that families chose their children’s schools for. A student who identified himself as Pedro Luna said, “Nuestra escuela es un lugar seguro donde los estudiantes se sienten apoyados… Por favor, no cierren nuestra escuela, inviertan en nosotros.” Public commenters repeatedly linked potential closures to trauma following recent fires and to disruption from the pandemic.
Union representatives and several parents warned that closures would disproportionately affect students of color and students with special needs. UTP members described large class sizes and the loss of health‑services staff that they say would worsen if campuses are consolidated. Francis Núñez, who identified herself as a parent and member of the teachers’ union, told the board the district should prioritize classroom staffing, special education and arts programs rather than consolidation.
Multiple commenters asked the board to consider alternatives to closure and to provide clearer, publicly available data on enrollment, capacity and the metrics being used to select sites. One parent urged the board to pause the consolidation process until data inconsistencies identified by the community education committee are resolved.
The board responded by reminding speakers that emailed comments would remain in the record and that staff would include community input in next steps. The session’s public‑comment period was limited to 30 seconds per speaker; the board recorded 56 comment cards for the meeting.
Next steps noted by staff included further community outreach and follow‑up in future board meetings; no formal consolidations or closures were approved during the session.
