Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Sizing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board and assembly agree to develop joint plan on school 'right‑sizing' after bond, levy losses
Summary
Following discussion of recent bond and levy results and public distrust, the school board announced an ad hoc right‑sizing committee and the assembly and board agreed to draft a joint proposal for a collaborative right‑sizing process to be circulated for the next joint meeting.
The Anchorage School District school board and the Municipality of Anchorage assembly on June 5 agreed to develop a joint approach to the district’s ‘right‑sizing’ process after months of debate and two failed funding measures.
Board President Jacobs said the board will form an internal ad hoc committee to review school-closure criteria and community engagement; committee members he named were board members Mcdana, Bellamy and Blakesley, and he offered to invite an assembly member to serve as a liaison. “We will create an ad hoc committee... to focus on the topic of school closures and right sizing and ways to improve our process,” Jacobs said.
Superintendent Dr. Bryant outlined data the district used in recent outreach, saying ASD has lost nearly 7,000 students over the past 15 years — “the equivalent of 14 completely full elementary schools” — and arguing that consolidation is one of the mechanisms needed to close structural budget gaps. He told the joint body that public surveys the district commissioned showed majority support among respondents for some form of consolidation when presented as an option to balance the budget.
Multiple assembly members and several school board members echoed concerns that the process damaged public trust. Member Silvers criticized the district’s past rollout and urged a long-term, consistent plan that avoids abrupt or repeated changes. Several members raised the non-financial costs of closures, including the difficulty and expense of demolishing or repurposing older schools and the potential impact on municipal budgets if property disposal requires extensive remediation.
The assembly motion introduced by Member Scout (and amended by Member Baldwin Day) asked the assembly chair and the school board president to collaborate with members on a proposal for a joint body or process. Members agreed to develop and circulate a proposal to committees and to bring a draft to the next joint meeting.
Why it matters: The district says it faces a multi‑year funding shortfall that will require difficult choices; the joint planning process aims to increase transparency and community participation before specific additional closures are finalized.
Next steps: The board will convene the ad hoc committee in mid‑July; the assembly chair and board president will work with respective members to draft a proposal for a joint working group to be circulated to both bodies ahead of the next joint session.
Sources: Board and assembly remarks at the June 5 joint meeting, including statements by Board President Jacobs and Superintendent Dr. Bryant.
