Board declines immediate change to elementary start times; votes to continue study and add parent survey

The Board of Education of Woodstock Community Unit School District 200 considered altering elementary school start times at its May 14 meeting and rejected an immediate adoption, instead voting unanimously to continue study and to run a parent survey.

Board members debated transportation logistics, family impacts and timing. Public commenter Casey Kurtz, a Greenwood Elementary parent and a school administrator outside the district, urged the board to survey families before making a change, citing established family schedules, the need for before-school care if start times shift and safety concerns about pre-K students riding buses with much older children. "Earlier start times allow for meaningful family routines," Kurtz said, adding that small shifts could require both before- and after-school care that is not currently available at many elementary schools.

The board first considered a motion by Mr. Hommel, seconded by Mr. Hedley, to alter start times to the schedule presented at the March 31 board meeting. That motion failed on roll call (Yes: Mr. Hommel, Mr. Hedley; No: Mr. Prezi, Mr. Miselli, Dr. Ferris, Dr. Bidwell, Mr. Gilmore). Following that vote, Dr. Ferris moved, and Dr. Bidwell seconded, a motion to continue investigating start-time changes and to include a parent survey, with the goal of not implementing a change for next year. The board approved that motion 7–0.

Discussion before the votes focused on bus routing and ride time: board members and staff said pre-K through fifth grade currently use shared routes and the district is aiming to keep individual student ride times to no more than one hour. Members who supported investigating the change said the plan could yield approximately 20 additional minutes of morning time for elementary students, which they argued could improve family routines. Opponents said the proposed adjustment created logistical challenges for transportation and staffing and risked disrupting families who have already set schedules for next year.

Board members asked staff to prepare materials for public engagement and recommended a timeline for outreach: draft communications and a survey could be developed over the summer, with a public rollout suggested in August and follow-up feedback gathering in September. Staff also said they would present possible scenarios to the board and collect input from middle and high school stakeholders as part of the evaluation.

The motion to continue study directs staff to prepare a parent survey and further analysis of routing and scheduling; no implementation decision was made at the meeting.

The board moved on to committee reports and adjourned the meeting following routine reminders about filing statements of economic interest.