Parents, teachers and community members urge Woodburn board to keep Success alternative school in its bond-funded building

Dozens of parents, teachers and community members urged the Woodburn School District Board on June 23 to reverse a recent decision to move the Success alternative high school into the main high school campus and instead preserve the program’s dedicated, bond-funded facility.

"Success was constructed using a voter-approved bond," said Adrian Montoya, a parent of a Woodburn High School student, arguing the community invested in the program’s mission and asking the board to "reconsider their decision and keep Success at its current location." Several speakers raised similar concerns about the process, saying the decision was announced with little or no stakeholder input.

Irene Montoya, a parent of a Success student, said the program offers smaller class sizes and individualized support that many students need. "Moving Success into the main high school campus would undermine the very reasons why the school was created," she said, warning that the change could raise anxiety, reduce attendance and jeopardize students’ path to graduation.

Teachers and alumni described the program as a lifeline. "This move will only serve to make this work more difficult and will restrict student access to the essential support they desperately need," said Max Sanchez, a teacher at Woodburn High School. Misha Plieger, a social studies teacher at Success, recounted staff and student reactions after the announcement and said students asked, "Why do they hate us?" — a line Plieger said reflected the harm of a decision made without dialogue.

Speakers also questioned the district’s financial rationale. Plieger said district staff had identified roughly $120,000 per year in lease savings from moving the preschool into the Success building but warned that converting a facility built for older students to licensed preschool use carries material renovation costs and regulatory requirements. Plieger cited an example conversion where a larger 25,000-square-foot project cost about $2.3 million and said Success is roughly 11,700 square feet. He also said Oregon funding is linked to average daily membership and estimated that losing five to 10 Success students could risk approximately $57,000 to $114,000 in annual revenue, depending on weighting.

Representative Leslie Muñoz, who spoke during public comment, framed the choice as one about equity and public trust: "This is not simply a facilities decision. This is a decision about student outcomes, equity, public trust, and whether this district is honoring the purpose voters believed they were supporting," she said, urging the board to pause and engage students, families and educators.

Several speakers repeated that Success was explicitly described in bond materials and that repurposing that space without meaningful engagement would betray voters’ intent. Community members said they had gathered petitions and signatures and asked for transparency, impact assessments and a “thorough explanation of how this decision was made.”

Board members did not take action on the relocation during the public-comment portion. Later in the meeting, district staff presented the preschool program’s current configuration and funding sources (Preschool Promise, Title I-C migrant, Title I-A and general fund for the teen-parent program), listing current capacity numbers, assessment tools and partnerships. Staff reported 72 Preschool Promise slots, one 16-capacity migrant classroom (served ~15), other Title I-A slots of 20 and 16 at two sites, and total preschool enrollment figures reported in the presentation as 124 (132 when infant/toddler capacity is included).

The meeting record shows widespread public concern about process and potential harm to Success students; speakers asked the board to provide a clear impact analysis, consult the people affected and reconsider the decision before implementing any move.

Next steps: the board did not vote on the facility repurposing at this meeting. Public speakers asked for follow-up through the superintendent and board chair; several said they expect the district to engage stakeholders and provide cost and impact analyses before moving forward.