▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:14:00 – 0:45:07

   1. • Ryan Reamer (McKean junior): Spoke in opposition to converting McKean into an Innovation Center

      • Morgan Dukes (McKean staff member & alumni): Opposed the proposed Innovation Center at McKean, arguing that it reduces student opportunities and cited a petition with over 2,500 signatures against the plan. 

      • Jared Obstfeld (executive board member, Friends of AI; former Red Clay student & parent: remarks delivered by Brenda Steffon) Raised concerns about the proposed McKean Innovation Center and related redistricting, referenced past transparency issues.

      • Brenda Steffon (AI High School Class of ’88; Board Member, Friends of AI): Expressed concern about declining AI enrollment, need for financial transparency and communication about Innovation Center. 

      • Becky Orr: Requested a pause or slowdown on the McKean Innovation Center proposal

      • Steven Fackenthall (General Music Teacher, Richey Elementary; President, Red Clay Education Association): Acknowledged District efforts to meet with staff about McKean Innovation Center changes, but emphasized the need for staff buy-in to ensure long-term success

      • Shaun Orr: Highlighted the challenges of midday transportation for students with disabilities related to the Innovation Center

      • Andrew Cleaver: Called for greater transparency regarding the McKean Innovation Center and district operations

2. Superintendent Report
   ⏯ 1:00:12

   1. • Superintendent Dorrell Green announced that the newly formed Attendance Zone Committee will meet. Red Clay's website has been updated and information shared with the community.

3. Board Discussion 
   ⏯ 1:06:37

   1. • Board Member Devon Hynson raised concern about choosing members for the new Attendance Zone Restructuring and Review Committee, member participation and committee transparency. Names selected.

⏯ 1:14:27

• Board members debated who will serve on the Attendance Zone Restructuring and Review Committee and revisited the discussion about community participation.

4. Board Committee Report
    ⏯ 2:06:34

3. 1. • Board Member Susan Sander provided an update on CBOC which met December 9, 2025; a slide presentation about the Innovation Center was mentioned. 

⏯ 0:14:00 – 0:45:07 Click to hear all comments or Click a name below to hear individuals.

Ryan Reamer: Good evening members of the Board, administrators, parents, and teachers. My name is Ryan. I'm a junior at McKean High School. I'm here tonight to speak against the proposal to close McKean as a comprehensive high school and convert it into an Innovation Center. I appreciate the time that you're taking to listen because this decision affects not just the building, but generations of students and an entire community. 

For my underclassmen friends, this decision means that they will never get to say they graduated from McKean High School. They won't be able to compete for McKean sports teams, and some may not graduate with their friends. In the past three years, I've watched my peers settle into the school, build connections, and truly grow into the incredible students they've become. For my family, McKean is a legacy. My grandfather and all of his siblings attended McKean. My father went to McKean. My uncle here, my uncle taught here as the automotive teacher, and my brother graduated from McKean. And now I'm a student here. That history matters. I'm speaking to you not just as a student, but as someone deeply involved in the school. I'm the junior class president. I'm a member of the National Honor Society and the student government. I'm captain of the swim team. I also play volleyball and work closely with the unified sports programs which I am very passionate about. I work with teachers, administrators, and students every day. And I can very confidently say that McKean is full of dedicated staff and motivated students who care about their education and their community. I would also like to mention how one-third of our student population is students with disabilities. Many of which are my close friends and teammates. We have so many programs and resources for these students and I worry what may happen to them after the suspending of McKean. Career pathways and innovation programs are important and I would never deny that. I support expanding opportunities for hands-on learning to other students, but that should not come at the cost of eliminating a fully functioning high school. Closing McKean as a high school sends the message to our students and our families and our community that our history is disposable. I urge you to listen to the voices of the students who walk these hallways every single day and give future students the same chance that I had to learn, to lead, and to graduate proudly from McKean High School. Please take the time to reconsider this decision. I love my school, my teachers, my friends, and the opportunity provided to me, as does the rest of the student body. Thank you for your time.

Morgan Dukes: Hi, I'm Morgan Dukes, a McKean alumni, current staff member, and Red Clay community member. The proposed Innovation Center reduces student opportunities and still has not been clearly communicated to the families and the public. McKean serves 40% of all the district's comprehensive high school students, including 44% of our special education population. Yet McKean's students families overwhelmingly are not informed about this plan and those that are do not support it. District representatives have stated that communication about this plan has been sent out to families. I've spoken to multiple parents of McKean students and the only communication they received was labeled as secondary programming changes and school choice. However, there's hardly any explanation about what an innovation center really is. The comment that this process has been transparent is disingenuous. Almost 2500 people, more than double the number of responses to the committee survey, have signed a petition opposing what they believe is McKean's closure. This does not reflect the informed support that the committee suggested. It reflects widespread confusion, and that confusion is a direct result of how this plan was handled. McKean was not named as the proposed Innovation Center site in the committee's rolling slides until their meeting in May, just one meeting before the committee's final session. The community cannot provide meaningful public comment when they do not know what is being decided or where to find information about it. To even understand the proposal, a person would have needed to already know the committee was planning to do this, have access to the internet to find the committee's website, dig through months of slides, minutes, and recordings to understand what an innovation center is, and then somehow figure out that McKean was the intended target despite the school staff, families, and students never being notified. I know individuals right now who believe this plan turns McKean into a votech high school. People don't understand what an innovation center is and that confusion alone proves that this process has not been transparent. At the public meeting at the end of the 2425 school year, several concerns were raised and the district is planning committees to address some of those concerns, but parents deserve answers before decisions are made finally, not the year before implementation happens. The implementation date of fall 2027 is not ambitious. It's extremely aggressive. How can families voice concerns about a plan they had not been clearly explained to them? How can students weigh in when they haven't been informed? How can the community support a vision they don't know is being built? Silence is not approval. You've heard the public at meetings, through emails, and through the petition. Their voices should matter. I urge you to pause this plan, engage the community honestly, and ensure that transparency and student opportunity drive your decisions. Thank you.

Jared Obstfeld: Good evening. I'm Brenda Steffon. I am speaking for Jared, who is celebrating Hanukkah tonight. Good evening members of the board. My name is Jared Obstfeld, executive board member of Friends of AI, a former

student and graduate of the Red Clay Consolidated School District, a concerned parent and an advocate for better education in Newcastle County. Over the past few weeks, I've spoken with neighbors in multiple parts of the

district, including families who live right near McKean, and many of them have no idea that there is a plan on the table to convert McKean High School into an innovation center or to significantly reconfigure our high schools and attendance zones. At the same time, the Redding Consortium is actively considering a redistricting option that will affect all of Newcastle County school districts and students either either positively or negatively depending on the performance or proper research and data collected on community-based needs, current educational deficiencies within our school, student and family support, transportation, and financial impact. That disconnect is alarming. On November 19th, parents and staff came to this very Board and testified that outreach around the McKean Innovation Center and related moves was insufficient, pointing out that a key district survey only reached a roughly 30% of families and was open for just eight days in the summer. They asked for clearer timelines, transportation plans, and enrollment impacts and did not get concrete answers that night. This isn't the first time communication and transparency have been questioned. Young versus Red Clay. The Court of Chancery described how during the 2015 tax referendum, the district's campaign strategy focused on mobilizing likely yes voters while deliberately avoiding outreach to seniors and other residents who might be a no. And a few years ago, this board itself complained to the EPA without delays in informing schools and parents about elevated lead levels in school water. A stark reminder of how dangerous slow or selective information can be. I'm asking you to commit to a proactive equitable communication by considering the following methods of community outreach and inclusion. Clear plain language website for the McKean innovation center and any redistricting proposals with facts, maps, timelines and translate it to major languages spoken in our community. Send district-wide emails and text messages when big proposals or surveys launch. Mail summaries in every household and affected zones and not just backpack flyers. Thank you for your time.

Brenda Steffon: Good evening. My name is Brenda Steffon, AI High School class of '88 and Board member of Friends of AI, a community of alumni originally brought together by our late band director Paul Perets. We continue in that legacy to understand what is happening and to advocate for the students, educators, and families of AI High School who rely on this district. Over the past year, our board has attended A to Z enrollment and

School Board meetings to listen, ask questions, and stay focused on what our community is experiencing. While we do not speak for McKean or Dickinson alumni, we stand in solidarity with their calls for greater transparency. As Friends of AI, our role is to press for the clarity and accountability these decisions require. AI high school enrollment continues to decline as several district buildings need significant and more efficient upkeep. At the same time, the

district is launching the McKean Innovation Center, a major structural shift that raises important questions about transportation, staffing, resource distribution, and long-term sustainability. We are not opposing new pathways for students, but these questions must be answered clearly for this plan to be put into action districtwide. Families need to understand how these changes will work in practice. These decisions overlap with other dynamic changes. Most recently, the Redding Consortium's decision for one Northern Delaware school district in review handling 45,000 students across the district. Families tell us that they are not receiving consistent communication about any of this. Some learned of major proposals only through social media or word of mouth and not through the district. When communication breaks down, the meaningful participation from the community becomes impossible. Our

request tonight is direct. First, provide quarterly public updates with clear information on major proposals, financial implications, resource shifts, and expected student impact. Families need one reliable point of reference, not short window surveys, or hard to find documents. Second, strengthen how information is delivered. Families across Wilmington, Hockessin, Newark, and Pike Creek are not receiving timely updates. Effective communication requires repeated outreach, multilingual and ASL access, digital and print materials, and in-person sessions that match community schedules. If the district wants meaningful input, it must make participation at multiple entry points possible. Friends of AI will continue to show up. We expect a district at that will meet this moment with the commitment, clarity, and responsibility these decisions require. Thank you very much.

Becky Orr: Thank you so much for letting me speak tonight.  I do also want to come here and just ask for a stop or a slowdown for the proposed McKean Innovation Center. I believe there needs to be greater transparency, communication, and community involvement regarding the Innovation Center and the changes that may be connected to it. Many parents, teachers, and students are still very unclear on how this plan will be implemented, what the timeline truly looks like, how and why decisions are being made. A lot of parents don't even know anything about it. I think if more knew, there'd be more people speaking tonight. It has not been broadcast like it said, like people have said to current McCain or Red Clay parents or students at all or in a clear open way. Current students and staff at McKean, they're in a particularly difficult position. They're going to be asked to make choices or choices are going to just be made for them that affect friendships, trusted teachers, and established support systems. These aren't small decisions, especially for students who rely on stability and routine to succeed. Transportation is another major concern.Just regular bus systems to and from school we all know is already a challenge let alone adding transportation in the middle of the day for regular students and special ed students. Also, what about students that are in sports, band, best buddies, etc. They have a sense of community with them with their groups. What are they going to do when they have to choose a school to go to or they just get put into a school in their senior year? Do they go with the one teacher they like or the other teacher they like? Do they even have a choice? Where are their friends going to go? McKean's a really strong school with a very proud community. And right now, we feel that changes are happening to us rather than with us. And that sense of losing community, it's painful. This really deserves attention. I respectfully ask the district to stop or at least really slow this process down to ensure meaningful transparency, open forums for parents and teachers, clear communication for students and staff who are directly affected. Awareness and voice do matter, not after the decisions are finalized by someone that's not even in the school building, but while they're still being worked on. Red Clay, you you know they say their goal is student success, but I don't believe that the Innovation Center is the answer to this goal and that's it. Thank you.

Steven Fackenthall: My name is Steven Fackenthall, general music teacher at Richey Elementary and proud president of the Red Clay Education Association. I'm here tonight to speak about the McKean Innovation Center. First off, I'd like to begin by thanking the district and Mr. Pruitt for offering to meet with any staff who have questions or concerns about the programming changes. I continue to push this opportunity to buildings. I also appreciate the work that has gone into collaborating with RCEA on processes for staff movement. Those efforts matter and have been noticed. All that said, I do want to emphasize an area that still needs attention. Staff buyin. While processes and timelines are important, the long-term success of any program depends on the people implementing it, believing in the vision, and understanding the value of the change. At this point, I do not believe that has happened. I encourage district to focus intentionally on building that trust and shared understanding because the success of these programming changes will ultimately be determined not just by how well they are planned but how strongly the people doing the work believe in them. I'd like to remind the board of a similar situation about 10 years ago when the district with Board approval decided to close Richardson Park Learning Center and Central Schools that were amazing at supporting students with special needs and dedicated resources to support those students. The district doubled down that resources would follow the students. Staff, including me, at the time continued to ask how those resources would follow as you couldn't split people. Needless to say, the schools closed and I would say we have never fully replicated the success of those programs. We should learn from our mistakes and do it better. This needs to happen with staff. With efficacy, you'll get the buyin and support to make these changes successful. And as you know, our working conditions are our students' learning conditions. I appreciate your time and happy holidays. 

Shaun Orr: Thank you, District leadership and Board, for providing us this opportunity. I would like to talk today about the Innovation Center. Particularly ask the Board to strongly consider the long-term effects of their actions. But I'm going to focus primarily on individuals with disabilities and transportation of those individuals during the midday. So while transportation may seem like a small part of the school day for many of our students, particularly those with disabilities, these transitions can be one of the most challenging moments they face. Many special education students rely on routine and predictability to feel safe and ready to learn. Midday bus rides, such as the ones required for student access to the innovation center, disrupt that routine. These interruptions can cause anxiety, sensory overload, and behavioral challenges, especially for students with emotional and behavioral or sensory needs. The effects of these transitions don't stop when the bus ride ends. Students often return to class dysregulated, leading to lost instructional time and difficulty re-engaging in learning. Even short disruptions can have a lasting impact on a student's ability to meet their educational goals. Transportation services are important and transportation by all means is necessary. However, it is our responsibility to ensure these transitions are as supportive as possible. Better scheduling, consistent drivers or aids, clear communication, and intentional transition supports can make a meaningful difference for students with disabilities and students without disabilities. All things considered, there is no guarantee that all of those supports will be consistently available for students with disabilities. And if they were able to be provided consistently, it still begs the question, why subject the most vulnerable population of students to that disruption in lieu of alternative solutions? Given the unpredictability of those independent factors, it is probable that students with special needs may not have access to vital parts of their educational experience. When we plan with empathy and purpose, we reduce stress, protect instructional time, and create a more inclusive environment for our students, which was Red Clay's push for including students into McKean and other comprehensive schools. Addressing midday bus transitions is not just a logistical issue. It's an opportunity to better support the whole child, including children with special needs and the most vulnerable population. Thank you for your time and your commitment to all students.

Andrew Cleaver: Evening Board. From what I'm hearing and everything going on here, we're talking about budgeting, we're talking about cost, stuff like that as well. What about financial transparency here? What's going on? Back on December 1st when I was here, the biggest question you guys were asking about all this Redding Consortium was the data for finances and stuff. The transparency the School Board should be liable for here because I brought yup a subject back on December 1st where we talked about the grading system, Infinite Campus, and also the progress book, because of my son and what we experienced. Today we actually learned, his mother and I called a special meeting to figure out what was going on. And one thing that was discovered by a State Rep is that the Infinite Campus isn't working. What I'm asking for is transparency. We found out today that there's actually a pilot program that we didn't realize what was going on for the building based autism class. That's there's no spelling words coming home, nothing like this. What I think people are asking for is transparency. Even in the facilities and buildings and maintenance. Because back on December 2 there was another Redding Consortium held for special education right here at this school. Didn't say which one or what building but apparently one building, I don't know what district, the elevator was not working and a student in a wheelchair, there's a few people that heard this, the child had to be carried up and down the stairs. Now, one, that's an ADA violation. Two, that's a fire violation. Three, that's a civil rights violation. I believe what people are asking for here is transparency. With the Innovation Center, people want to know what's going on. And it's like there's a clear understanding of another transparency. I don't know if you guys are aware of it. 3600 Mill Creek Road. What do you guys have planned for that? Because it was bought by the State of Delaware for $4.3 million and then transferred to Red Clay Consolidated School District. Where's the transparency? Thank you and have a good evening. 

⏯ 1:00:12

Dorrell Green: Reimagining Secondary Education. I know there was a call for more transparency and one of the things was a dedicated website. So we will be launching and it will go live as a dedicated web page to learn more about Red Clay's plan to expand access to CTE pathways through the McKean Innovation Center, industry recognized credentials, early college credit and hands-on innovation experiences at the Thomas McKean Innovation Campus. And again, I will publicly say this to the Board and we've heard a number of public commenters. We have really one time upon us to get it right and you know whatever the Board's desire is and collectively as a community for us to get it right I sit here as a Superintendent putting it out there that whatever we need to do to to make sure that happens. 

There was a vote last evening with the Redding Consortium to look at moving forward with an option of a Newcastle County consolidated school district. Now, regardless of whatever happens with Redding, we're still responsible for the students who are under our charge in our care, including our staff members as well. And if we need to go slow to go fast, the reality of it is we're competing with ourselves in Red Clay. We've highlighted that through the Attendance Zone committee reports. We've looked at 20-year data analysis. We have a middle school that for 50 years has served anywhere from 700 to 750 students that's now sitting at 381. 

We're the microcosm of choice and charter in terms of how we've really taken our student enrollment and expanded opportunities. However, the overall enrollment hasn't grown in our district. And so, we are at a tipping point where we have to do something. And collectively, however, we do that with the committee, the status quo just isn't going to get it. So, we have to figure out what that change is and really truly provide more opportunities for students and have a clear vision. And if that means again, we got to do our due diligence to communicate that more broadly, we stand at the ready to do so. But one or two things are going to happen: Either change is going to happen for us or it's going to happen to us. 

And so, however, we can collectively work together with our community to ensure that we are making clear-eyed change, but also not allowing legacy and history to anchor us in the past and allow ourselves to move forward so that our students of today have opportunities. Our communities don't have - we're not the chemical, we're not the credit card, we're not the corporate capital of the world. We're not the car  - So a high school diploma of just simply getting a diploma and getting a job and going into an industry within Delaware, that period is long gone. So it does require innovation. It requires integration. It requires some hard decisions that have to be made. But we have to be clear-eyed about what does this mean for the learner of today and future learners of tomorrow. And you know going through that Redding process clearly seeing that people made decisions and even in Red Clay made decisions in a moment in time. You know, Mr. Fackenthall just alluded to what this building used to mean to so many and that decision in 2010. So much of what we're doing is because of previous decisions that were made, right? 

Making ourselves competitive within the district, prioritizing within the district to the point that we've cannibalized enrollment within the district and being clear-eyed about when certain schools were at their peak, it was at the expense of other Red Clay schools. So, we have to be clear out about what we're talking about and how we're talking about it. And unfortunately, a lot of that wasn't known. And so, we again have to focus on that. But, we will have an active website that will go live tomorrow to provide updated information. We'll work with our comm's department. We'll continue to engage with the McKean staff and others as we continue to move through this process. 

And ultimately, whatever the decision that the Board makes, we'll work and address accordingly.

⏯ 1:06:37

Devon Hynson: Am I allowed to ask a question?

Dorrell Green: If you would like to.

Devon Hynson: So, what I think I heard from the community is that there wasn't enough transparency, right? And it sounds like the way that we scheduled this was to do it this way. So it wouldn't make sense to repeat the same thing that we did last time and expect a different result this time. 

Dorrell Green: So we're not, well this is selecting community representatives to express interest in participating in the committee that the board established.

Devon Hynson: Right. And I think that is where the challenge comes in because there could be people that in that envelope that wanted to participate, right? And because they weren't selected, they weren't able to.

Dorrell Green: They can still participate. They just wouldn't be committee members because the Board has a framework in terms of the number of people that serve on a committee.

Devon Hynson: Right. But it sounds like it's structured in a way that they come and they speak at the mic. They're not really participants. 

Dorrell Green: No, it's a committee. This isn't - so, this is selecting members to serve on a committee. So they're selecting public names of people who express interest and serving in a formal capacity on a Board committee. So they're selecting two people and individuals from each of your respective nominating districts. And then those whose names aren't selected, who express interest, will still have the ability, but they're just not formal committee members

because the committee itself has a member from each nominating district, which is the framework for a Board committee.

Devon Hynson: I guess my point is every other committee, they're not really participants. They're commenters. Like they're not able to just come, sit at the table and be included in the conversations and the decision-making, right? Where you have a chair, you have people that are there, that are involved, the people that are voting members, and everybody else can just make a comment, but they can't really give their input. There's really not a substantive way for them to be included. 

Susan Sander: May I interject a point of order at this point? 

Devon Hynson: Okay. 

Susan Sander: When we established this committee, Attendance Zone and Restructuring committee, it was always meant to be a listening session for the public. It was never meant to be interactive. Our job as a Board is to oversee the planning of the Innovation Center. We have now given it to the district and said plan it. Plan it to the best of your abilities and keep us informed every step of the way. This review committee is how we are doing that. These committees, this committee is open to the public. These meetings will not be in private. They will be on Zoom. Open to the public. These are the representatives from these districts who will then hear the information about the plans and have the ability to take it back to their community, back to their schools, back to the parents who are saying they're not informed. Now, we're giving them one more communication method. 

Devon Hynson: Okay. So, what I'm hearing is that you're okay with it just being a listening session for the community. 

Susan Sander: Yeah.

Devon Hynson: So, what I'm making clear is that as a Board member, I think that that's fundamentally unfair for the community to be locked out and just be able to listen and not be included in the conversation. That's it. So, if that's the way it goes, that's the way it goes. But I'm just telling you, my perspective is I just don't think that's fair.

⏯ 1:14:27 Board discussion resumes

Dorrell Green: At this point we need the Board to determine which of the three Board members would like to participate. Not everyone raise your hand at once. 

Susan Sander: So are we asking for Board members now?

Dorrell Green: So for your committee there are three Board representatives who will participate in that. And so now we have to determine which of the three Board members would like to participate, have the time and the availability to serve on the committee. 

Vic Leonard: I would like to put my hat in the ring since I’ve been with it from the beginning.

Devon Hynson: Absolutely.

Susan Sander: I’d like to put my name in. 

Beth Twardus: I would as well.

Dorrell Green: So, we have four Board members who would put their name in. 

Susan Sander: Do we duke it out? 

Dorrell Green: Well, I don't want you to duke it out.

Vic Leonard: Wrestle, right? 

Dorrell Green: And again, I think because they're public meetings, just being mindful these meetings will be noticed. And so if you have three active members serving, it does not prohibit from a previous ruling that we had for other Board members to engage as participants, but the fourth would not, in essence, actively engage. So if you have three -

Vic Leondard: and an alternate

Dorrell Green: Well if you want an alternate you can have an alternate. But again it just really takes you three of you, or four of you, we simply put it in there if you want it.

Susan Sander: I do not know how to resolve it. 

Jose Matthews: No, you just sign up. There's -

Beth Twardus: So, somebody just has to step out.

Susan Sander: Somebody has to step out.

Cross talking 

Devon Hynson: The challenge is if you're of the opinion that you think that it's just a reporting committee, why would you want to participate? 

Beth Twardus: Devon, I can't hear you. 

Devon Hynson: What I'm saying is if you're of the opinion that that's just like a reporting committee, then why would you want to actively participate? Just wait for the report, right? Like let other people that believe that the committee should be developed as a way of engagement and parent and family engagement and inclusion, right? Like if you're of the opinion that that shouldn't take place in that committee, just wait for us to come and report to you what happened in that committee. That would make sense - 

Susan Sander: Once again

Devon Hynson: That would be logic.

Susan Sander: The idea of the committee was to be a listening session. There will be no input and that was clearly stated. There will be no input. These are listening sessions.

Devon Hynson: Right. And I appreciate that. But what I'm saying is if that's your stance -

Susan Sander: Yeah.

Devon Hynson: I don't understand what would make you want to actively participate -

Susan Sander: He stumped me. That question is not making any sense. I'm sorry. 

Devon Hynson: Maybe somebody can ask it another way. Jose, can you ask it a different way?

Jose Matthews: I don't know if I can rephrase your words. Essentially, I think what's being asked is why do we have Board participation when ultimately the Board ends up receiving the reports and approving the outcome anyway? Is that correct? 

Devon Hynson: Correct. That would be the appropriate approach. 

Jose Matthews: So the proposal would be for the Board members to step back. Correct?

Devon Hynson: Correct. If you're of that opinion.

Jose Matthews:  No, no. I'm just asking that. Is that what you're asking? 

Susan Sander: That was the stated purpose. I apologize. 

Jose Matthews: Don't worry, no no. 

Susan Sander: Point of order. That is the stated purpose. It is not my opinion. It is simply the charge that we were given as a board for this committee. It is not my opinion. It is what this committee was intended to do. Listening session. We need to hear from the experts. We need to hear the district and how the plans are going to proceed. Pure and simple. 

Devon Hynson: Sounds like we need to figure out who's going to be on the committee and who's not. 

Naj Landis: I'd like to say that I'm on no committees yet, so I'd like to be a part of one. 

Dorrell Green: So, in fairness to Ms. Landis, I think she should have the first selection. And again, that's I, as only the Executive Secretary advise the Board. 

Devon Hynson: I agree.

Dorrell Green: And I will say I agree - hearing the discussion. Please know that we did give an alternate proposal to actually have a work group that would have done two things:  really engaged folks as an advisory and serve in that process. But we find ourselves where we are right now that we have it as a structured board committee. So it's going to, in essence, require three board members to serve in an official capacity. So Miss Landis is one. Now you need two others.

Devon: I'm in. 

Susan Sander: I'm putting my name in.

Devon Hynson: So it will be us three. 

Dorrell Green: So can we agree, Mr. Leonard? I know you were the fourth. Are you willing to take one for the team because you will be informed and actively engaged to allow Ms.Landis, Ms. Sanders, and Mr. Hynson to serve in the Board capacity.

Vic Leonard: Of course.

Naj Landis: Thank you.

Dorrell Green: That's very noble of you, Mr. Leonard. Thank you, members of the Board. So we have that established. Are we okay with moving forward?

⏯ 2:06:34

Susan Sander: We went over the McKean Innovation center. Mark Pruitt was kind enough to present the slide presentation again and it was wonderful. There were a lot of questions, a lot of answered questions. It was an excellent, excellent presentation. 

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Webpage 

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Rolling Slides 

📄Red Clay Attendance-Zone & Programming Committee July 2025 Recommendation to the School Board For convenience, the full text of the document is typed below. 

Red Clay Attendance-Zone & Programming Committee Current Recommendation to the School Board

Core Principles

Alignment of Attendance-Zones: Create straight line feeder patterns that align high school attendance zones with existing middle school attendance-zones. 

Balanced Enrollment: Distribute students equitably across attendance-zone high schools. 

Program Equity: Ensure that all students, regardless of high school, have access to high-quality academic and extracurricular programs. 

Program Change #1: Establish the “Thomas McKean Innovation Campus” The committee recommends that Thomas McKean High School be reimagined as the Thomas McKean Innovation Campus through expanded partnerships with local colleges, universities, and the business community. This flagship hub will provide coursework in the following areas: 

• Career and Technical Education (CTE)

• Industry-standard credentialing programs

Early college credit opportunities As part of this change:

• The number of comprehensive high school attendance-zone schools would be reduced from three to two: Alexis I. duPont High School and The John Dickinson School. 

• These two comprehensive high schools would split the Red Clay high school attendance-zones equally, allowing for increased enrollment and more robust academic and extracurricular offerings. 

• These two attendance-zones better align with middle school attendance-zones, allowing for straight line feeder patterns from middle school to high school. 

• Short shuttle bus transportation would be provided from AI High and Dickinson to the McKean Innovation Campus for career, technical, and early college coursework. 

Program Change #2: Relocate the John Dickinson Middle Years Program (MYP) 

To allow for increased high school enrollment at The John Dickinson School, the committee recommends relocating the MYP middle school program from Dickinson to Skyline Middle School, allowing for a more balanced enrollment across the middle schools. 

• Additional Recommendations for Future Consideration

• Middle School Attendance-Zones: Reevaluate middle school attendance-zones, especially as they pertain to the Warner Elementary School community, to improve feeder pattern continuity and equity. Virtual High School Programming: Explore the development of virtual high school coursework to expand flexibility and learning opportunities for Red Clay students.

📋Citizens Budget Oversight Committee December 9th, 2025 Meeting Minutes For convenience, the full meeting minutes are typed below. 

Citizens Budget Oversight Committee Meeting 

December 9th, 2025 District Office- Board Room/ 6:00 pm 

Attendees: Community Members: Bob Chase, Ken Davis, Lynne McIntosh, Marianne Roken, Ray Sander, Cathy Thompson Building Reps; (Anthony Gray- Bolden, Kendra Todd-Dixon, Mark Vankerhoven) RCEA Rep: Amy Mirolli) BOE Members: Susan Sander, Vic Leonard, Sr. Red Clay Chief Operating Officer: Ted Ammann; Staff: Steven Andrzejewski, Committee Chairs: Nate Schwartz, Chris Miller

Agenda: 

Old Business: 

Approval of November 2025 minutes

Tax Reassessment Update: The property tax deadline has been extended to December 31, 2025. 

No changes since last month. 

Revenue is now 38% of what we expected to receive 

Some information on the county appeals process has been provided by the state. Stipulations process will take place first. This hearing will result in a new negotiated tax amount for the property owner. There are currently 182 owners scheduled for a full hearing. 

There is approximately $50,000,000 of assessed property value. 

Delmarva provides their own property assessments due to the utilities. There is approximately 1.4 billion in assessed property values to shared in the county. 

A bulk of the tax receipts will come in January. The February final budget report will provide an update on the revenue, but it is expected that the next few years will see some loss of revenue for the district. 

New Business:

McKean Innovation Center: Mark Pruitt presented the Secondary Attendance-Zone & Programming Committee history and current plan. 

Monthly Expenditure Report. 

The district is on target with expenditures and payroll Several of the Expended Thresholds over 60% were discussed. 

Public comment 

Next Meeting is scheduled for January 13th, 2026 in the District Office

🌐Reimagining Secondary Education Thomas McKean Innovation Campus District webpage 

🌐School Choice in Red Clay 

🌐Redding Consortium Redistricting Materials 

📄Redding Consortium Plan and Process 

📄DACCTE Full Meeting Minutes December 11, 2025

📄State of Delaware CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION PERFORMANCE AUDIT Fiscal years ended June 30, 2022 and 2023 - Summary

📄State of Delaware CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION PERFORMANCE AUDIT Fiscal years ended June 30, 2022 and 2023

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:20:01 – 0:39:52

   1. • Morgan Dukes (McKean staff member & alumni): Reported 77% of McKean staff oppose the Innovation Center plan and there is concern for student impact.

      • Jessica Schroeder (parent) Requested to delay implementation of the Innovation Center plan and criticized the low-participation in summer survey.

      • Sakura Irving (parent) Raised concerns regarding redistricting, capacity, and transportation equity.

      • Jenny Howard (parent):  Raised safety concerns about district transportation, cost for Innovation Center routes and the Board to be guided by community input. 

      • Steven Fackenthall (General Music Teacher, Richey Elementary; President, Red Clay Education Association) Expressed support for McKean staff raising concerns and emphasized the need for the district to communicate. 

2. Superintendent Report
   ⏯ 0:58:07

   1. • Superintendent Dorrell Green announced an open call for parents and community members to serve on a new Attendance Zone Committee.

3. Board Committee Report
   ⏯ 1:11:40

   1. • Board Member Vic Leonard: Due to so many missing committee members, the McKean Innovation Center presentation from Mr. Pruitt was postponed until next month's CBOC meeting on December 9th.

 ⏯ 0:20:01 – 0:39:52 Click to hear all comments or Click a name below to hear individuals.

Morgan Dukes: Hi, my name is Morgan Dukes. I am a McKean High School alumni and current staff member. McKean staff completed a survey related to the innovation center and I wanted to share the information collected with you all. Staff are aware of the plan. They understand it but they overwhelmingly do not support it. In fact, 77% of our staff oppose it with 60% being strongly opposed. Their top concerns are not personal. Job protection, salaries, and comfort did not appear among the top issues listed. Staff are worried about the risk to students, lack of transparency, and the proposed timeline. These are all people who work closely with our students, and they're asking you to slow down and look closely at the implications. Staff believe that most parents and students are largely unaware of the plan. They don't understand its consequences and therefore cannot offer informed support. When the people most affected are the least aware, that's a serious warning sign. Staff specific worries are concrete, immediate, and consequential. First, they fear serious impacts to special education, disability services, and vulnerable learners. Learners who rely on continuity, proximity to services, and stable environments. Staff feel that this plan puts that at risk. When students with the greatest needs face the greatest risks, caution is not optional. It's a moral obligation. Second, there's concern about the lack of transparency and limited stakeholder engagement. Many feel the process has moved forward without honest communication or meaningful input from teachers, parents or students. That perception erodes trust and without trust implementation will fail. Third, staff highlight an unrealistic timeline that could disrupt learning and erase programs students count on to help them graduate, stay engaged, and stay on track. You can't build innovation on instability, and students can't learn in chaos. Educators know what it takes to execute a complex transition, and they're telling you that this timeline will not work. Innovation should solve problems, not create new ones. These concerns come from professionals who support our students daily. They know what works. They know what puts students at risk. And they're asking you to pause, reassess, and truly engage the families and staff who will live with the results of this decision. Data from the committee's own survey reinforces these concerns. Only about 50% of parents and staff districtwide supported the proposal. These numbers don't indicate consensus. They indicate a divided community, and acting on them as if they reflect informed support is irresponsible. No one is against innovation, but innovation without stability is disruption. Innovation without transparency is untrustworthy. And innovation without safeguarding our most vulnerable learners is unacceptable. Our staff are urging you to pause this plan, bring families into the conversation, and redesign it with the people that it will impact the most. That's not resistance, it's responsible leadership. Thank you.

Jessica Schroeder: Good evening, Members of the Board. My name is Jessica Schroeder, and I'm here to speak about the high school and programming changes. In 2022, after years of instability, multiple moves, a pandemic, and six different elementary schools, my family finally found where every family hopes for, stability and community. We purchased a home in a neighborhood within walking distance of a school, the John Dickinson School. We chose this neighborhood because of the school, because it meant shorter commutes, independence, academic excellence, and a walkable community where my kids could finally put down roots in the decade ahead. My family's MYP students are thriving. But this plan takes that stability away and fractures community trust in Red Clay. The programming committee's recommendation approved by the Board on July 9th, 2025, moves the entire MYP community, including students, staff, administrators, and the pre-IB curriculum to Skyline Middle School by fall 2027. Families like mine had no way to anticipate this when making life-altering decisions like buying a house or completing a school choice application. This change will reshape thousands of families. Community input was gathered through a survey that was open for only eight days in the middle of the summer. It was rushed, quietly released. It obscured key details and included no timeline. It reached only 3% of Red Clay families. Any educational researcher will tell you that a 50% response rate is the threshold for valid input. That is not community engagement. That is statistical rounding being used to justify a plan shaped more by political pressure than by equity or educational excellence. Meanwhile, teachers and staff, the backbone of our schools, are left facing uncertain positions, duplicated roles, disrupted teams, and the impossible task of maintaining stability for students amidst more questions than answers. This abrupt change in the direct is in direct contrast to the Red Clay Consolidated School District's core values of meaningful collaboration and a safe and nurturing environment. Especially in light of future changes coming from the Redding Consortium. Tonight, I'm asking the Board to delay the implementation of this plan. Not permanently, not drastically, just responsibly. Delay implementation so that this transition can truly choose excellence, choose opportunity, and choose Red Clay with thoughtful planning, genuine community engagement, and continuity protections that minimize harm to students, families, teachers, administrators, and the quality of the programs we claim to value. For the sake of stability, trust, community, equity, for the sake of Red Clay students, especially those currently in sixth grade MYP and in 9th and 10th grade at Thomas McKean High School who made their choice without all the information. Delay this plan now. Thank you.

Sakura Irving: My name is Sakura and I'm a Red Clay community member. I'm writing just to express my extreme concern about the direction of the redistricting process. I want to talk about what Red Clay is actually proposing. The committee is considering eliminating high schools, turning McKean into an innovation center. And that means hundreds of students that are currently assigned to McKean will be redistributed to schools to other schools. And there's no clear explanation of where these programs will go. What is the capacity of the schools that they're moving into and what this does to class sizing and staffing. You guys are also reviewing feeder patterns which directly impact families coming through every school without the community engagement. This means many children could lose the straight line feeder patterns they were promised. Some would attend maybe three different middle and high schools in just a few years based on the timeline. But to me, the most glaring contradiction came on May 1st when the committee removed the goal of equitable choice busing because the district cannot fund it. If we can't fund  transportation of choice students now, how can the district justify moving entire neighborhoods between schools without a fully funded transportation plan? Transportation is equity and without buses, there's no access to programs, honor courses, or specialized pathways. We can't pretend this is happening in isolation. These changes are unfolding at the same time the Redding Consortium is discussing pulling Christina's Wilmington students into Red Clay or consolidating districts entirely. An overhaul that could take three to five years and would fundamentally change enrollment, staffing, taxes, and most importantly, resource allocation. As a member of the community, I'm deeply uncomfortable with being asked to accept major disruptions to our children's stability with partial data, inconsistent messaging, and an unclear timeline. Families deserve to know how many students will be displaced, what schools will absorb them, and what the capacities of those schools are, especially being as though the district is typically running under staffed for nursing. How will these feeder patterns change for the schools that we are keeping in? How many more transitions will our children face? And how can we claim equity when transportation has already been cut before boundaries are even finalized? Right now, this process is anything but transparent, not formally formed, and not aligned with the district's own stated values. Before any plan moves -

Jenny Howard: Hi, good evening. My name is Jenny Howard and I'm here to speak about three issues that share the same themes. Equity, accountability, and protecting all students, not just some. First, the student activities policy. The policy needs clear language affirming that every student has fair, inclusive opportunities to participate across all schools. Without this, equity isn't enforceable. Second, the transportation policy. Safety requires a clear, accessible way to report hazards. The district should establish a process for reporting unsafe routes and bus stops, publicize it and monitor it, and review concerns promptly. This is basic governance and public safety. Finally, the high school plan, which is my biggest concern. Assigning all of Wilmington and all of the Meadowwood students to AI, while Dickinson becomes a suburban school with fewer high needs students, concentrates poverty, disability, and city enrollment in one school, creating de facto segregation. The district claims equal access to CTE programs, but questions remain. What if schedules conflict? What if high demand programs fill up? Are city students less likely to get seats? due to their long travel times. Is there a lottery if seats are full? Transparency is also a huge issue with this plan. The one town hall we had, the community was given less than a week's notice and it was the last week of school last year. The board then voted in the middle of the summer under the guise of we have to move forward with the plan and we can change it later if needed. Also, if straightline feeder patterns are a stated goal, why do the new boundaries still split schools like Warner while concentrating every Wilmington student at AI? The community needs an honest answer about whether this is phase one of removing Wilmington students from suburban schools. Additionally, we haven't seen a cost comparison about how choice busing for all high schools versus daily travel to the CTE hub compares. A fairer alternative would be to treat AI, Dickinson, and McKean as district-wide magnet style high schools with choice busing for all just like Cab and Conrad get. This balances demographics, prevents segregation and expands opportunity. Right now, this plan is being done to the community and not with the community. That is a huge problem that we need to change. Thank you.

Steven Fackenthall: Good evening, board. My name is Steven Fackenthall, music teacher at Richey Elementary and president of the Red Clay Education Association. First off, welcome board member Ms. Landis. I'm sure we'll get to know each other very well. I look forward to working with you and the entire Board for the betterment of our profession. I'd like to briefly talk about American Education Week and also class size. Thank you to our educators, specialists, administrators, education support professionals, and all employee groups for making our public schools the very best they can be. It takes a team to educate, inspire to keep our schools safe and healthy, and to create welcoming learning environments that allow young people to prepare for their future. By working together, we create the great public schools our students deserve and our nation needs. Thank you to all. Lastly, we recognize the district is not requesting a waiver this year and hasn't to my knowledge the past few years, the past few years, which is great. We recognize we appreciate the district's recognition that lower class sizes are beneficial for learning. I would truly love Red Clay to take the lead in how class size is actually determined. The antiquated ratios that say someone can be in a classroom for 30 minutes can be and lowers the ratio is absolutely absurd to me. Lower class size also shouldn't come at the cost of another desperately needed resource for our buildings. I'm just saying in general things it's a band-aid. The formula is a band-aid. We really should lead the way. As National Education Association President Becky Pringle says, we want all the things. We want all the things. We want lower class sizes so educators can reach every child with efficacy. And as I say, our working conditions are students learning conditions. I'd also like to thank Morgan Dukes and the rest of McKean for coming out. As I shared last month, we have to be overly communicative in what this is looking like. That's getting into those buildings, sharing those concerns, answering those questions, and I'm hopeful that the McKean staff and all staff will come out and continue to share those concerns for answers from our district. I appreciate your time.

⏯ 0:58:07

Dorrell Green: As many of you heard, there is an opening as the Board committed to wanting an ongoing committee. So we are looking for parents and community members to participate in the committee for the attendance zone and transition program that again we've heard from many public commenters but as we continue to engage with our schools and our communities around opportunities to advance the District. So that is an open call. So we want your participation on the restructuring and review committee that the board has commissioned us to have. So there is information we'll make sure again we continue to push that out. Miss Mobley just as a constant - you know on social media and other channels - to ensure that folks are aware and have that opportunity to engage.

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:8:40 – 0:39:52

   1. • Jennifer Beyer (parent): Discussed middle school at Dickinson and need for more social emotional support.

      • Steven Fackenthall (General Music Teacher, Richey Elementary; President, Red Clay Education Association) Urged the Board to ensure transparency and broad communication.

      • Jenny Howard (parent): Urged the district to pause the new high school plan, citing limited community representation and top heavy district influence in the committee. 

2. Board Action Items - Attendance Zone Committee Proposal (Amendment), Discussion and Vote
   ⏯ 0:35:10-46:25

   1. • Board Member Susan Sander made a motion to amend the original proposal to create an advisory group in place of a group that provides input; Mark Pruitt explained there will be several subgroups doing the work on the Innovation Plan and this committee will receive updates. The group will be listeners. 

⏯ 0:8:40 – 0:39:52 Click to hear all comments or Click a name below to hear individuals.

Jennifer Beyer: My name is Jennifer Beyer and I'm here tonight as a parent of a John Dickinson Middle School student who truly cares about not just academics but also the climate and culture within our schools, especially at the middle school level. Middle school is such a unique and critical time in a child's life. It's a period of enormous change socially, emotionally, and developmentally. Students are trying to figure out who they are, where they belong, and how to manage friendships and emotions that are often new and overwhelming. Because of that, the environment around them, the tone set by the adults in the building, the expectations for how students treat one another, and the support systems in place matter tremendously. What I've noticed, and what I've heard echoed by other parents, is that while our district does a strong and incredible job emphasizing academics, there seems to be less attention on the social emotional side of student life. I think that imbalance can really impact how our students experience school. When kids don't feel connected, safe, or supported, it affects not only their well-being, but also their ability to focus, learn, and thrive. I'm not here to criticize, but to advocate for balance, for a greater focus on fostering kindness, empathy, and inclusion. Things like advisory programs, social emotional learning opportunities could go such a long way towards helping students develop stronger relationships and healthier coping skills. Even small changes, consistent expectations for behavior, more communication between staff and families, and spaces where students feel heard can make an enormous difference. Ultimately, I believe that a positive climate and culture is the foundation of everything else we want to accomplish academically. When students feel emotionally supported and valued, the entire school community benefits. So, I'd just like to encourage the district and the board to look closely at how we can strengthen that social and emotional framework in our middle schools especially because our kids are not only learning facts and formulas, but they're learning how to be people and that's something worth investing in. I appreciate your time, your service, and your commitment to our students. Thank you.  

Steven Fackenthall: Good evening, Board. My name is Steven Fackenthall, general music teacher at Richie Elementary and president of the Red Clay Education Association. I'm simply here to talk about the attendance zone and restructuring committee vote that is on for you tonight. I am hopeful that if this were to pass that the committee and the district are overtly transparent in their discussions and decisions that are being made because those decisions and discussions are being made are for staff and community members that are going to be most impacted. I am hopeful not only are they going to be overtly transparent in their discussions and decisions, but seeking input from the staff and the community most impacted in every possible way. I know that there were some admin that went over last week during one of their faculty meetings. I appreciate that. I'm hopeful that every avenue of transparency in decision-making, discussions and seeking input will be made for those mostly impacted by any decisions. I really appreciate your time. Thank you. 

Jenny Howard: I'm here tonight to discuss Red Clay's new high school plan and the growing concern that it's being developed for the community but not with the community. The committee behind the plan was top heavy with district administrators, parents, and community members made up barely a third of that group. And the imbalance is clear. The proposal doesn't reflect family's priorities or what's best for all students. Many families still don't understand what this plan means for them. Parents are confused, frustrated, and losing trust. Now, we're hearing that CAB Calloway, and Conrad students who already have access to selective programs and additional resources, will also have access to the innovation center. If that's true, why would any parent choose Dickinson or AI? Plans like this only make our schools more divided and our system less equitable by further concentrating opportunities in certain sought-after schools. The same pattern shows up in transportation. The district's own rules aren't applied consistently. Some choice students are granted hub stops or routes outside their feeder zones while others are denied that same access. And these inequities start early. For example, every non-title one school has its own full-time talented and gifted teacher serving K-5  students, while title one schools share one teacher across multiple buildings. Those students lose out on early enrichment opportunities that others take for granted. With that being said, I urge the district to pause this plan and rebuild it with transparency, fairness, and authentic collaboration. That includes creating a real family engagement plan, one that gives parents, students, and community members a meaningful role before decisions are made. Red Clay families want to be partners, not spectators. Equity means access, transparency, and opportunity for every student. Thank you for your time. 

⏯ 0:35:10-46:25

Vic Leonard: Switching that around, I think this next one would have some comment.

Hugh Broomall: It is recommended that the Red Clay Board of Education approve a new committee to be named the Thomas McKean Innovation Center Working Group as submitted.

Jose Matthews: So moved to approve.

Susan Sander: Second.

Vic Leonard: Thank you. It's been properly moved and seconded. Any discussion?

Susan Sander: Yes. I would like to amend the committee as originally stated. In light of the fact that we need to get information to families, educators, and the community in general about the proposed McKean Innovation Center, I propose that we change this from a "committee" to the "Thomas McKean Innovation Center Working Group."

My reasoning is that I’d like information reaching families in real-time as opposed to going through the series of commitments it takes to serve on a formal committee. I would also like to propose that the working group is made zoomable and open to the public, so information is disseminated in real-time to families.

Hugh Broomall: How about I ask Mr. Pruitt to share a little bit about how the advisory working group is going to work and how they’re going to be transparent?

Mark Pruitt: I’ll offer some context. This is exciting and meaningful work, but there needs to be flexibility. We began with an internal steering committee of 12 district administrators. They are overseeing what will be 16 subgroups over the next two years. The leaders are putting together time-bound benchmarks, back-mapping from August of 2027 with key action steps needed to launch. Once that finalized working draft is ready, we will put together subgroup teams. These groups are very different: 

the move of Adult Education from AI High School to McKean

a communications subgroup

a facilities subgroup

a DIAA athletics/extracurricular subgroup

and a funding subgroup.

The makeup of each will look different. For example, the Adult Ed transition will look different than student services. We are also pivoting existing groups, like the Student Superintendent Advisory Committee, to get their feedback on the transition. Additionally, we are putting together this advisory working group of experts. We’ve already engaged with the Department of Labor, Goldey-Beacom College, University of Delaware (Demography), ChristianaCare, DelTech, the Department of Education, Rodel Foundation, Wilmington University, and Emerging Delaware. We want them to join an overriding advisory working group. We have to meet them where they are; we might not get 16 experts to a Tuesday night meeting at 6:00 PM, so we may have them present to the teachers and parents on the committee instead. Either way, we will update the Board bimonthly.

Vic Leonard: I have a few questions. One, will these meetings be open to the public?

Mark Pruitt: We can certainly make them open to the public and put them on Zoom.

Vic Leonard: Yes, we’d like to do that. And we’d like Board representation at these meetings as part of the deal.

Devon Hynson: Where did you get the members for these subcommittees?

Mark Pruitt: We have not established the subgroups yet. There are six key working groups. The first step is establishing the benchmarks by back-mapping from August 2027. Once done, we will reach out to small groups to do the work, primarily within the workday.

Susan Sander: We are proposing that there be Board members and representatives from the nominating districts on this working group so we have active listeners. We realize this is not a group giving input; it is a listening and communication group.

Mark Pruitt: I think it’s important to note that when we meet with experts to negotiate legal terms for clinical space or apprenticeships for students, that won't happen at 6:00 PM. But a progress report on those steps can happen at 6:00 PM.

Vic Leonard: Mr. Pruitt, a main question I get is: what is the benefit to students and how do we determine curriculum or pathways?

Mark Pruitt: In 2022, we looked at a labor market analysis of jobs over the next 10 years. We have great CTE (Career and Technical Education) pathways; McKean is our flagship for that. We will move existing pathways from AI High and Dickinson there. We’ve identified growth in allied health, healthcare technology, cloud security, AI, networking, and clean energy.

Susan Sander: Technology is going to be changing things. Our career pathways will need to be updated as technology changes so students can find jobs.

Jose Matthews: Point of clarification: I want to make sure that if approved tonight, we have a period for public comment at all of these meetings.

Susan Sander: Thank you, I appreciate that. Yes, definitely - a point during the working group meetings where public comment is available.

Vic Leonard: Is there a motion to approve the amendment first?

Devon Hynson: So moved.

Susan Sander: Second.

Jose Matthews: That was for the amendment. Now we go to the motion for the working group itself.

Vic Leonard: Is there a motion to approve the recommendation for a working group?

Beth Twardus: So moved.

Susan Sander: Second.

Ms. Stevens: Unanimous. Motion carries. 

📄AMENDED Proposal for Thomas McKean Innovation Center Working Group October 15, 2025 For convenience, the full text of the proposal is typed below. 

Proposal

The Thomas McKean Innovation Center Working Group

The Thomas McKean Innovation Center Working Group is responsible for supporting the Red Clay Board of Education and District Administration in transitioning Thomas McKean High School into the Thomas McKean Innovation Center. The Working Group will provide expertise, input, and advisory recommendations from community partners, families, educators, and students to ensure the Innovation Center is responsive to the needs of the district and community. The group will serve as an advisory body rather than a traditional board committee. 

The Working Group

This Working Group serves to assist the Board of Education with communication between the administrative personnel leading the Innovation Center transition and community advisors providing professional expertise. Community partners will serve in an advisory capacity, strengthening collaboration between the district and external organizations, and ensuring that the transition reflects workforce needs, educational priorities, and community values. 

Working Group Goals: 

• Provide progress reports to the Board of Education regularly (bimonthly – every other month). 

• Ensure alignment with district goals, workforce development needs, and community expectations. 

• Offer advisory feedback on: 

  • Facility redesign and program development. 

  • Workforce and career pathway programming. 

  • Staffing transitions and professional development. 

  • Student enrollment, transportation, and support services. 

  • Funding strategies and sustainability planning. 

  • Timeline and launch of the Innovation Center. 

• Support inclusive community engagement by bringing forward input from families, students, educators, and external partners. 

• Deliverables: 

The Thomas McKean Innovation Center Working Group will provide the Board of Education with: 

• • Bimonthly reports on transition planning and implementation. 

  • Timely, public-facing updates for families, educators, and community partners. 

Final recommendations to guide the successful launch of the Thomas McKean Innovation Center. 

Scope of Responsibilities:

The Working Group will act as a communication and advisory platform, not a governing committee. Its responsibilities include: 

• • Providing feedback to district leadership to ensure best practices are followed. 

  • Advising on alignment between academic programming, workforce pathways, and community needs. 

  • Ensuring input from community partners, families, and students is considered in board and district decision-making. 

  • Serving as a bridge to strengthen collaboration between the school district and external organizations. 

The Working Group will meet every other month (bimonthly), beginning in October 2025 and continuing through October 2027. Additional meetings may be scheduled to address transition milestones and ensure timely communication with the Board of Education. 

Expectations of Members: 

Working Group members are expected to: 

• • Attend meetings consistently. 

  • Contribute perspectives and expertise relevant to the transition. 

  • Interact respectfully and collaboratively with other members and stakeholders. 

  • Communicate information within their networks to promote understanding and engagement. 

Community partners serving as advisors may choose to conclude their participation at any time, while district and board representatives will be appointed in accordance with Red Clay policy. 

Expectations of the Life of Working Group: 

The Thomas McKean Innovation Center Working Group will operate from October 2025 through October 2027 to guide the innovation center's planning, transition, and launch. It can be extended if additional advisory support is needed.

📄Proposal for Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee September 17 2025 For convenience, the full of the proposal is typed below. You can also view the original PDF document using the link provided.

Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee Proposal

• Charge Statement: The Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee is responsible for requiring Red Clay District personnel, tasked with developing a plan to satisfy the proposal agreed upon by the Attendance Zone and Programming Committee and voted upon by the Red Clay School Board, to present progress reports to this committee to assure understanding for all stakeholders affected by this plan and to monitor financial, personnel, transportation, and student issues associated with this plan. 

The Committee: 

This committee serves to assist the school board with communication between the administrative personnel charged with the Attendance Zone and Restructuring and ensure community involvement in the proposed changes. 

Committee Goals: 

Provide progress reports to the board on a regular basis (bimonthly – every other month) regarding the plans for the realigning of the attendance zones, MYP programming at Skyline, proposals for school choice, staffing changes, transportation plans, funding, Innovation Center progress, and launching dates. 

Deliverables: 

The AZ and Restructuring Review Committee will provide the board with all proposed recommendations and ensure information is available for all stakeholders including Red Clay community members, families, and educators. 

Scope of Responsibilities: 

The AZ and Restructuring Review Committee will act only as a communication platform for the board to keep the board aware of the changes proposed by the administrative personnel, and to ensure best practices are followed and input from community stakeholder is communicated to the board. 

Timeline: 

This committee will meet every other month (bimonthly), unless deemed necessary to meet more frequently, beginning with October, 2025 and ending in October, 2027 (to ensure any additional information is communicated to the board. 

Expectations of Members: 

AZ and Restructuring Review Committee members are expected to attend meetings, voice views, act responsibility, interact politely with other members and community. Members shall not miss more than 3 meetings in any school year (July – June) time period. Board members on the committee are selected in accordance with BP 9004 and community members can decide at any time that they wish to end their service on the Committee. 

Expectations of Life of Committee: October, 2025 through October, 2027. 

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:12:40

   1. • Charles Lockerman (Friends of AI): Raised concerns about transportation funding for the Innovation Center.

2. Superintendent Report
   ⏯ 39:47

   1. • Superintendent Dorrell Green discussed equitable access to college coursework in Red Clay, including AP, IB, and dual enrollment. 

3. Board Action Items - Attendance Zone Committee Proposal
   ⏯ 1:08:37 - 1:14:13

   1. • Board Member Susan Sander made a proposal to create The Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee to track attendance zone changes and implementation through 2027, with Superintendent Dorrell Green offering to have the District synthesize the essence of the proposal to ensure the final version accurately captures the Board's intent and logistical requirements for a vote next month.

⏯ 0:12:40

Charles Lockerman:  Good evening. Red Clay board members, how you guys doing today? Good. I just wanted to talk a little bit about what we've been doing. The Friends of AI at AI High School, we had a senior barbecue to welcome them back to school. Staff and AI alumni doing that. The alumni were actually able to sponsor shirts for all 50 seniors for this year which you know is great because just like the end of the year it's just one less thing that they don't have to worry about that helps them. I took photos in the school on the first day of the school. I've been taking them with the football team. I'm gonna do it for all the sports. When I drop the flash drives off to the school, they actually have a program there in the curriculum for computers that they would edit the photos. So, I'm literally just going to provide the material and the students are going to edit the photos for the school, which I think makes everything a little more interesting. The kids are talking a lot about the alumni band and homecoming again because they want to see us out there. So, that's what we're planning to do. The 24th is our big upcoming event. We're going to play again like we did last year and just keep the tradition going. 

Other than that, I just wanted to switch gears so I get this point in too. I researched the plan that you guys all proposed and everything and the only thing that confuses me is AI High School has less students because the choice busing was taken away among other things. But I feel like that can make an impact. But instead of giving AI more buses to bring students to the school to increase the attendance, you want to give buses to take them to an innovation center and then go back and forth with the upper classmen throughout the day. What doesn't make sense to me is you have money for buses for that program, but you won't allocate any to help the school increase their enrollment. Upcoming we have - besides homecoming - we have some other things that we're planning with the staff and with the principles in the loop and so is the athletic director on everything. So, it looks to be an exciting year and I look forward to the next time I can talk to you with another positive update. Thank you for your time. Have a good day. 

⏯ 39:47

Dorrell Green: And then fall data again at a glance around college level coursework. I think it is important when we look at equitable opportunities for students to participate in rigorous learning. Our fall coursework at a glance and these are college level courses that include Advanced Placement, IB courses, or Dual Enrollment courses in partnership with our local universities whether that's The Early College Academy that we rebooted several years ago for students who are taking courses at Goldey Beacom, students who are taking courses at DelTech. Zion, if you don't mind, what career pathway are you in?

Zion (Conrad student presenter): I'm in the biotechnology pathway. 

Dorrell Green: And are you currently taking any kind of dual enrollment courses, AP courses or anything?

Zion (Conrad student presenter): I take three AP courses. I don't take any dual enrollment courses.

Dorrell Green: So that's an opportunity. Again, Zion is an example of taking those three AP courses where he's earning those college credits. Gives him a leg up to be able to go into college if that's what he chooses to do to have those credits upon graduation. It also makes them marketable for colleges when they have that opportunity. And for our students who choose to go straight to the workforce, the fact that they can put that on some type of resume, it definitely makes them more marketable. There are transferable skills. When we look at our AP seminar course, which we're making that an anchor course for all sophomores, those transferable skills through that AP seminar course, help students across life again through communication, through collaboration, their ability to work, to process information. So this is just some data from the beginning of the year. And if you look at the trajectory from year 2022 to 2023, you see a clear indication that the number of students  who are participating in those college level courses has grown substantially across the district. We're seeing that correlation hopefully through SAT data and the more that we anchor ourselves and providing students with those rigorous opportunities we're certain that we'll see positive outcomes. Just to promote some events, October 22nd, we will have our College and Career Fair will be hosted again at Alexis Dupont High School. Where we'll have over 100 colleges, universities, the military, local businesses. This is aligned with our vision of career and college ready just to again promote so that Red Clay is a destination upon graduation for our students to go to the workforce, military career, but to be a destination for those who are seeking students who are life ready.

⏯ 1:08:37 - 1:14:13

Vic Leonard: Items submitted by the Board. We have the Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee proposal. Ms. Sander?

Susan Sander: Thank you. I propose the establishment of the Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee. This initiative represents one of the most significant changes to the Red Clay district in decades. The financial and stakeholder investment required for this project will be extensive and enduring, with the expectation of long-term success. The School Board has a responsibility to ensure that our community of staff and families is well-informed about the changes related to the programs, transportation, district costs, career pathways, and the timeline for implementation. Accordingly, this requires a committee with representation from each nominating district. It’s important to note that this committee is not tasked with proposing changes, but rather reporting on the progress of plans related to the attendance zone and restructuring.

Vic Leonard: Okay. Any discussion? Is there a motion?

Susan Sander: I think we have to…

Dorrell Green: So, there is no motion tonight. This is just a notice of it, and then the Board will come back next month to vote.

Vic Leonard: And so we can have discussion?

Dorrell Green: You can have discussion, yeah.

Vic Leonard: I’d just like to say I think it’s a great idea. It’s bi-monthly, correct?

Susan Sander: Correct. Bi-monthly. I apologize, I forgot to indicate that. Every other month. Apparently, "bi-monthly" can mean two meetings a month, so I would require the planning committee to meet with us every other month for updates on the plans.

Dorrell Green: My general question to the Board is: do you want that update at a regular Board meeting? Or, if you’re saying bi-monthly, is there a subsequent meeting where you want the committee to update the Board? That would require notice. I’m just being clear in terms of dates, timing, and efficiency. Do you want the committee to meet, and then update the Board from those meetings?

Susan Sander: Definitely. It will be a separate meeting.

Vic Leonard: Any other discussion?

Beth Twardus: I noticed on your timeline the life of the committee starts in October 2025 and ends in October 2027. Is there any reason for 2027, or is it until the completion of the project?

Susan Sander: The plan is to be implemented in September of 2027, I believe. I wanted to ensure that all the details are wrapped up, and that’s why I proposed we go until October of 2027 in case there are any last-minute updates the Board should be aware of.

Beth Twardus: Is there a mechanism, then, if plans get delayed for whatever reason, to continue the committee after October 2027? If the situation hasn't fully resolved itself or flushed out, is there a mechanism to extend the committee, or are we set to 2027?

Susan Sander: I would love to see a mechanism put in place, definitely.

Vic Leonard: I think it was in the proposal, if we need to go further.

Dorrell Green: Okay. May I ask something of the Board? If that is indeed the case, after you leave the Board meeting and digest this, please submit that information. We’ll gather the information and work with Mr. Pruitt so that when you come back next month, we have something efficient.

When you talk about "nominating districts," there is a process for how we actually solicit those districts. That might put us out further and delay your timeline. If it’s okay with the Board, submit your info, we’ll synthesize it to get the essence of what you’re saying, and provide feedback so that next month you have something you can vote on that hits the intent you want.

We already have a cadence in terms of getting out to meetings in October, for example, representative student groups. My neighbor, Mr. Mike, who is a graduate of McKean High School, Class of 1975... we heard public comment last month from alumni. They have their 50th anniversary luncheon this Sunday. I’ll be joining them to engage and share insight. There are things already happening to engage the community, and while I know we want a formal committee, we will provide feedback and work with Ms. Sander to dialogue so the Board knows we are engaged.

Vic Leonard: Yeah, I think it’s modeled like the Facilities Committee where the district gives updates on facilities. I’m happy to see it and hopefully we can make that work. Any other discussion? 

📄Proposal for Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee September 17 2025 For convenience, the full text of the proposal is typed below. 

Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee Proposal

• Charge Statement: The Red Clay Attendance Zone and Restructuring Review Committee is responsible for requiring Red Clay District personnel, tasked with developing a plan to satisfy the proposal agreed upon by the Attendance Zone and Programming Committee and voted upon by the Red Clay School Board, to present progress reports to this committee to assure understanding for all stakeholders affected by this plan and to monitor financial, personnel, transportation, and student issues associated with this plan. 

The Committee: 

This committee serves to assist the school board with communication between the administrative personnel charged with the Attendance Zone and Restructuring and ensure community involvement in the proposed changes. 

Committee Goals: 

Provide progress reports to the board on a regular basis (bimonthly – every other month) regarding the plans for the realigning of the attendance zones, MYP programming at Skyline, proposals for school choice, staffing changes, transportation plans, funding, Innovation Center progress, and launching dates. 

Deliverables: 

The AZ and Restructuring Review Committee will provide the board with all proposed recommendations and ensure information is available for all stakeholders including Red Clay community members, families, and educators. 

Scope of Responsibilities: 

The AZ and Restructuring Review Committee will act only as a communication platform for the board to keep the board aware of the changes proposed by the administrative personnel, and to ensure best practices are followed and input from community stakeholder is communicated to the board. 

Timeline: 

This committee will meet every other month (bimonthly), unless deemed necessary to meet more frequently, beginning with October, 2025 and ending in October, 2027 (to ensure any additional information is communicated to the board. 

Expectations of Members: 

AZ and Restructuring Review Committee members are expected to attend meetings, voice views, act responsibility, interact politely with other members and community. Members shall not miss more than 3 meetings in any school year (July – June) time period. Board members on the committee are selected in accordance with BP 9004 and community members can decide at any time that they wish to end their service on the Committee. 

Expectations of Life of Committee: October, 2025 through October, 2027. 

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:04:13 - 0:18:17

   1. • Monica Ball (McKean Alumni): Raised concerns forcing students into a career pathway limits learning options; also raised concerns about Innovation Center transportation costs.

      • Mike Brenner (McKean Alumni): Questioned the rationale for converting McKean into an Innovation center

      • Jenny Howard (parent) Criticized the rushed approval of the high school restructuring plan without meaningful community input; asked for pause.

      • Jenny Chorman (parent): Expressed that closing a high school is not the solution; instead, she suggested making them more comparable to magnet and charter schools.

2. Superintendent Report
   ⏯ 29:57

   1. • Superintendent Dorrell Green confirms that the Innovation Center timeline is public information and accessible. 

⏯ 0:04:13 - 0:18:17 Click to hear all comments or Click a name below to hear individuals.

Monica Ball: I just wanted to make some comments about the concerns about the McKean as an Innovation Center. I'm a 1975 graduate of McCain. My daughter is a 2018 graduate of McCain.We're getting ready to have our 50th reunion this year. So, about another month from today, actually, we're going to be having a fun kind of reunion. And we're getting ready to get a holly tree placed up there, which is a state tree of Delaware at the high school. My concerns have to do around the career pathways as a graduation requirement. I'm a little concerned. I think it's a state requirement. I don't think it's the best idea. I would like to see some statistics at some point if this is actually working for the students when they graduate. I think that pigeon-holing kids in the ninth or tenth grade into a particular career pathway is not correct. I would like to see a focus more on the comprehensive curriculum more in the three schools and maybe reduce CAB and Conrad's enrollment if that has to come about. I'd like to see more elective classes and possibly take these career pathways into a smaller set like if that's possible either, like a month-long class or whatever. Not three years. My daughter was in this and it didn't really work out for her. She went a completely different pathway. But the support was there and McKean has a really good handle on it but that's not the only thing that you want.  Kids in high school to actually explore different pathways for careers. You don't want them pigeonholed into certain areas. We actually have talked about transportation costs. That's one of the things that's a big concern for me. I have lived in this Red Clay district. I've lived here at the same address for almost 70 years. I've been a part of the whole area here in the McKean environment for going on 50 years here. I'm trying to see maybe the teachers could rotate between the high schools, maybe give them some exposure to different career areas.Like I said, maybe even reestablish the Wilmington City School District at some point. But back to the whole thing with McKean, I would love to see it just stay where it is. There's talk now about a couple people have brought in about maybe getting a referendum, a public referendum and a public vote on the next election. That's maybe a good idea. I know it would delay some things, but you know, let's try to think a little bit slower here on this and not put McKean in the grave as far as a high school is concerned. I'm really concerned that you're jumping the gun here a little bit. this. I can talk more about it later if you need me to. My three minutes are up. So, thank you.

Mike Brenner: Good evening. My concern is I don't know that this has been all that well thought out with McKean. Again, I'm a graduate as well. I graduated in Monica's class ‘75. After looking over the different things that I've read about, I'm confused as to why they'd even want to consider putting the McKean into a VoTech and moving all these people around when AI has such a small - has more room - that you could put Charter  there or you could put Cab Callaway there to help fill that up. And as far a vote, you're not using Linden Hill or Skyline Middle School. Why not move to make a VoTech school there? And bussing people from Cab Callaway or Wilmington Charter to AI would seem to be a much easier path to go than moving all these people around. McKean has 96% enrollment. That's the reason is - we all live here. We're all doing this and I think that it would be the wrong move to take McKean and make something different out of it. That's all I have. Thank you.  

Jenny Howard: Good evening. My name is Jenny Howard and I'm here to address two urgent issues. The opportunity funds and the high school restructuring plan. First, let's be clear. This is not about flexibility. It's about equity. Opportunity funds exist because of a lawsuit to correct historic inequities. These dollars were intended for schools with the highest concentrations of low income students and English language learners. When waivers allow funds to spread across every school, we don't lift all boats. We widen the very achievement gap this law was designed to close. Second, the restructuring plan. This decision impacts every student in our district. Yet, it was approved without meaningful community input. Families, teachers, and students had little chance to review, ask questions, or provide feedback before the vote. Rushing a decision of this magnitude undermines trust and risk creating inequities that will last for years. We deserve better, and our kids deserve better. Equity can't exist without transparency, and trust can't exist without inclusion. Here's what we're asking for. Publicly post opportunity fund allocations and staffing changes in plain language. Pause the secondary school's plan until families and educators have a real voice in shaping it, not just reacting after the fact. True engagement isn't telling us what's already happening. True equity means planning with the community, not around it. And I just want to say to Mike Matthew Mike Matthews last point about board docs, it is really hard for the public to see what's going on and to be able to publicly comment on it prior to votes when board docs is not opened up until hours before the meetings. So, if there's anything that the board can do or the district can do to open up board docks sooner, that would be great because yes, we can see the general agenda a week in advance, but we can't see and I understand not all presentations might be ready, but if they are ready, it would be nice for the public to be able to see these things and that way they have adequate time to digest it and then give meaningful comment at the board meetings. I think you would see a lot more engagement that way and I really hope that this year we can work all together and make it the best year yet. Thank you.

Jenny Chorman: Good evening everyone. My name is Jenny Corman. My children attend Red Clay schools. I don't have much prepared but I would like to talk about the opportunity funds. I think they should stay in the schools they are allocated with. I'm advocating for that. We hear all the time that teachers  are not well paid and also teachers in all the schools - not just the low-income schools - are always investing their own money into supplies and stuff needed in their classrooms. So I would like to advocate for for those schools to keep the money

and just see the needs there. There is a reason why some schools have more lower income students. I'm not just talking about English learners. I would also like to talk about the taxes. The company that was hired, I don't think that was in Red Clay decision to hire the Taylor company that did the assessments. It was ridiculous. They didn't even study the market and they just put numbers on houses. The price numbers are just over the top. The last thing I would like to talk about is the high schools. I do think something needs to be done, but I don't think closing one high school is the solution. It will be more effective to make the three high schools in the Red Clay more equitable or comparable to the magnet and charter schools. That's it. Thank you.

⏯ 29:57

Dorrell Green: And here's just a timeline that's in my report for the secondary attendance zone updates. And again, I won't go into detail about it, but we find ourselves right here going into the fall of 2025 communicating the plan and then working with various stakeholder groups to ensure that again we continue to engage. So that timeline is within my report. It is public knowledge and public information.

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee webpage

📄Superintendent's Report August 20, 2025 Innovation Center Timeline page 8

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:30:25 - 0:40:10

   1. • Morgan Dukes (McKean staff member & alumni): Urged the board to vote against the committee’s Innovation Center proposal; risk of losing staff and disrupting student services.

      • Val Gould (McKean Alumni & AZ Committee member): Urged the board to vote against the committee’s Innovation Center proposal; District sidelined AZ Committee's focus on attendance zones to pursue the Innovation Center.

      • Jenny Howard (parent): Asks how this plan dismantles inequities; Calls for equal access to rigorous courses, arts, CTE, and extracurriculars at all high schools.

2. Presentation to the Board and Discussion
   ⏯ 1:36:28 - 2:44:59

   1. • Mark Pruitt, Director of Secondary Education and committee members presented the work of the Secondary Attendance Zone Enrollment and Programming Committee to the Board, covering the committee’s findings, analysis, stakeholder engagement, and final recommendations for the high school and middle school attendance zones and programming.

3. Board Action Items - Attendance Zone Committee Recommendation

     ⏯ 2:53:25 - 2:56:37

3. 1. • Superintendent Dorrell Green recommended that the Red Clay School Board approve the recommendation of the Secondary Attendance Zone Enrollment and Programming Committee as submitted.

⏯ 0:30:25 - 0:40:10 Click to hear all comments or Click a name below to hear individuals.

Morgan Dukes: Hi my name is Morgan Dukes and I am speaking about the proposal put forth by the secondary attendance zone and programming committee. I'm not only a McKean staff member but also a McKean High School alumni. VoTech high schools used to be shared time facilities. Students were bussed from their high school to a VoTech facility for vocational education. When enrollment decreased, state and local officials, including the superintendent, were interviewed and several issues were noted, including a communication and integration between schools, funding, transportation, and extracurricular activities. All things that were also brought up by community members as potential problems at the committee's public meeting in June. In the end, VoTech schools became full-time. The McKean student body is the largest student body of all Red Clay high schools. And that's not even including the Meadowwood students that are also serviced within the walls of McKean. Redistributing these students and our staff will cause large disruptions to not only McKean students and families, but the larger Red Clay community and could lead to a loss of skilled teachers at a time when they're difficult to find. If Red Clay were to move forward with the proposed innovation center, we would only have 139 available seats left at the high school level. If we gain any additional students as a result of redistricting, we would be severely limited in space. And based on McKean's capacity, only 57% of Red Clay's current non-charter high school students would be able to attend the innovation center. This does not seem equitable. McKean currently serves large populations of marginalized groups, including special education students, MLL students, and low-income students. With some of these groups overlapping, I don't see them represented within this proposal. Redistributing these students to other high schools would disrupt the specialized support services and programming that these students receive and could lead to detrimental outcomes. Additionally, these students are being asked to step into an entirely new environment with new adults, students, and expectations, which presents a new set of challenges for them to overcome and could be seen as obstacles for them to even join a CTE pathway at the innovation center. Not only that, but the special ed services, supports, and policies that are in place and normalized within one high school may not be recognized or supported by an innovation center, thus risking legal repercussions. Instead, career pathway options should be spread across the high schools with each school offering some common pathways while other pathways are only offered at certain high schools. Currently, there are several career pathways that students are not being offered in Red Clay that they would be interested in. By creating new pathway options across the high school, students could then choice to the school with the pathway that they want. Yes, this is costly, but creating an innovation center with new pathways and paying for transportation would be costly, too. Based on the operations impact shared by Mr. Ammon at one of the committee meetings, this proposal would have one of the greatest impacts to our operations across multiple levels. Therefore, I implore the board to vote against the committee's proposal and make it a great day to be a Highlander. Thank you.  

Val Gould: Good evening everyone. I am Val Gould. As many of you already know, I am a member of the Attendance Zone committee. I am also a former Red Clay teacher and will be about to rejoin the district as music teacher at Baltz. I want to share a few thoughts on the proposals that you'll be voting on tonight, courtesy of the Attendance Zone committee. Our charge as committee members was to work toward equitable outcomes for all of our students. All of our students, not just some. However, it became evident very early on that some of the district administration had other ideas in mind and that idea was an innovation center. As a result, we spent very little time on addressing attendance zone concerns such as the attendance zone issues at Warner and some of the other schools in our district that are affected by poorly designed attendance zone feeder patterns. This district through its former board and administration, not likely anyone in this room, have created this situation of underenrollment at AI and increasingly neglected traditional high schools here in the district through its support of charters and magnet schools which have created or I should say recreated a form of school segregation where traditional high schools like McKean, Dickinson, and AI have become all but afterthoughts. I urge this board to reject the innovation center proposal. Instead of creating yet another wheel in a district already full of wheels that have run over the idea of equity, our time and resources should be spent creating a level playing field on which all of our students and staff will find pride, success, and joy in their education. The disrespect of those who need our support the most has gone on way too long. It is time for this board to start making things right again. Please vote no on the innovation center. Thank you.

Jenny Howard: My name is Jenny Howard. I'm a mother of four and a former Red Clay teacher. I'm here tonight to talk about the proposal to restructure Red Clay's high schools. The plan responds to declining enrollment without addressing why enrollment declined in the first place. It's because our system has not served all students equitably, especially those from our most marginalized communities. Red Clay's own data shows that access to college level courses, extracurriculars, and enrichment is not equally distributed. Schools like Conrad and CAB offer twice as many AP and dual enrollment courses at traditional high schools like McKean, Dickinson, and AI. These gaps are not due to student interest or ability. They're the result of policies that privilege some students and exclude others. These aren't just program differences. They are life-altering disparities. A student who earns a year's worth of college credit

in high school can save their family 10 to $25,000. That's not just savings. It's generational opportunity. And when those options are concentrated in selective schools, we are protecting pathways for privilege. Meanwhile, students in underresourced schools get less fewer reg they get fewer rigorous courses, fewer clubs, fewer sports, fewer staff, and fewer chances to shine. That's not accidental. It's the predictable outcome of a system that siphons students and resources into exclusive programs. This proposal doesn't reverse that. It codifies it. By consolidating schools without fixing the inequities that caused the decline, we risk cementing a two-tiered system. One for students with access and advocacy and another for students told to make do. And let's be honest, those students are overwhelmingly from communities already underserved. So, I asked the board, how will this plan dismantle rather than reinforce inequities that harm our most vulnerable students? Will every high school, not just magnets, be guaranteed full and equal access to AP, dual enrollment, the arts, CTE, and extracurriculars? And will the district commit to an annual equity audit to make sure we're not tracking students by race, income, or neighborhood? Because equity isn't just about who gets in the door. It's about what they find when they get there. If we don't confront the structures that created these disparities, we're not solving anything. We're just institutionalizing inequity. 

⏯ 1:36:28 - 2:44:59

Mark Pruitt: Six of us, including myself, from the committee will be presenting the work we've done over the past seven months on the Secondary Attendance Zone Enrollment and Programming Committee. The work actually initiated at the November 2024 School Board meeting when there was a recommendation for vote through a presentation that the Board approved the Secondary Attended Zone Enrollment and Programming Committee. It was amended and the amendment was that we provide a recommendation and an update at this July meeting. 

So the committee started work immediately. As many of you remember we put out requests for anyone who would be interested in serving on the committee to our community. 118 folks put their names in. We selected names out of a folder, one from each nominating district in your area. So we have seven public members that served on the committee including three board members, three RCEA members, three district administrators and three school administrators. I can tell you this, they came with different points of view, opinions and expertise but as someone who facilitated the committee I can't tell you how much I appreciate all of them for their willingness to meet our norms. We were respectful at all times. They were collaborative at all times. And had that not been the case, it would have been very difficult to herd 19 people and shepherd them along. So I really appreciate their willingness to serve on the committee. 

You're going to see some slides tonight. We're going to go through a lot of slides. It is just a small fraction of the work of this committee. The committee has a website. You can go to the website. It has everything that we've done, every piece of research that we put up. I would particularly note rolling slides which outline all seven meetings that we had, as well as every video recording in its entirety from every meeting.

The charge from the School Board in November was to evaluate the enrollment, programming, and attendance zones of Red Clay Secondary Schools and make recommendations to the Board at the July 2025 meeting. In doing so, our committee was to consider strong and balanced enrollments across schools, the impact of attendance zone changes and alignment of those boundaries to existing K-8 attendance zones when possible. There had been changes to kindergarten through 8th grade attendance zones in 2015. 

Part of our charge was to align the high schools with that, equitable access to quality education for all students and come back with the advantages and challenges of each of our recommended options and ideas through data analysis, community feedback and research. The committee met seven times. There were six initially scheduled. The committee felt that in order to meet our timeline, we added a May 1st meeting. You see some general topics of the work we did.

We spent the first two months on the committee looking at data, both historical data in the district and current data in the district, as well as lots of infographics that shared that information and after looking at that the committee came up with some key findings to sort of guide our work. 

The first was that high school attendance zones were last updated in 2002, resulting in no straight line feeders and a fragmented city of Wilmington. So, as I said, the colors of these schools, HB, the the four middle schools, Stanton, Skyline, HB, uh, and AI Middle School, they're in color. The green boundaries are the current boundaries last updated in 2002. I would point out two particular points here that I think show some of the problems with this:

One is McKean High School is sort of central and has all four middle schools feed into it. So there is no sense of community K-12 once you get to high school. There's no sense of a counselor working at one high school working at one middle school to bring those students in. The second is that the boundaries of the high schools in the city of Wilmington still exist from a desegregation order in 1981. Very fragmented when compared to K-8 attendance zones. 

The second finding was that high school enrollment has remained constant for the most part. It's fluctuated by a few hundred over the years, but during the last 20 years when enrollments remain constant, we've actually added two schools. And we went from five schools to seven schools. This has resulted in 1,000 extra seats, more than 1,000 extra seats in our seven high schools. Which also currently has AI high school with less than 600 students in it. But we've also seen that at John Dickinson High School in 2019 and McKean High School down into the mid 700s a few years prior to that. 

Another key finding was that AI High has less students in its attendance zone when compared to John Dickinson and McKean High School. We did a lot of work. Pulled this comes from 2022-2023 data. But we pulled out everyone where they live, including our own schools, our own charter schools, Newcastle County, Votech, other charters, and private schools. And you see that potentially a lot less students are available to go to AI than the other two schools. 

Very similar to the high school situation,  middle school enrollment actually declined a bit over the past 20 years, but again, we've added two more schools during that time period. And so again, you see a larger number of seats, than you have students to fill those seats and you see vacuums and low enrollment, for example, at a school like Skyline with a projected 420 students for next year with a capacity of 750. 

The next one is that the Warner community has no distinct feeder pattern. There are two elementary schools. Every one of our elementary schools feeds into one middle school - except Brandywine Springs and Warner. And that's fine. I'm sure that had to be done in 2015 and there had to be some decisions made. However, that group of fifth graders, 150 kids,  that moves on to sixth grade, they go to two middle schools and then three different high schools. That really resonated with the committee. 

After the key findings we showed the impact of underenrolled schools at the high school level. What you have is college access courses, dual enrollment courses, advanced placement courses, and IB courses at each of our five high schools. Another simple example is when you don't have enough enrollment, it's going to be hard to fill out. You see this a lot in the news, right? Like when we fold up a football team, everybody knows that there's not enough students in the school to fill 26 interscholastic sports, plus junior varsity sports for those programs.

Next, an additional piece of data which actually was released from the University of Delaware's applied demography and survey research center is that they released a 30-year projection of Newcastle, actually the entire state, but Newcastle County enrollment in public schools over the next 30 years. All five districts will decline according to their projections with Red Clay projected to decline by 3,000 students over that time period. Assuming of which about 1,000 would be high school students. 

Tawanda Bond: For those of you that may not know who I am, my name is Dr. Tawanda Bond. I am the senior director of teaching and learning and I'm part of the committee that's been working on this for the last six, seven months. So, one thing that we looked at when we talked about ideas coming out of this committee is really making sure that we had a platform for equitable voice on our committee. So, if you take a look here going back to Mr. Pruitt's goals that he expressed at the beginning of the presentation, we stuck to these four goals throughout our conversation over our six months of meetings. And then we talked about our rules. So, we really had a space where people could bring ideas. There was no criticizing. We encouraged. We built on each other's ideas and weren't afraid. So, no idea was too big, no idea was too small. 

These were some of the committee's ideas that we initially came up with and I'm going to walk you through these and then I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Jay Bastinelli who is the principal of HB DuPont middle school to talk a little bit about some of these things and also Mr. Shawn Snyder to talk a little bit about some of the next steps. 

So we looked at repurposing one high school as a technical high school innovation center that would result in two attendance zone high schools. Our second was to make this innovation center available to middle school students. So these were just brainstorming ideas. Move John Dickinson Middle School program to Skyline to allow for increased high school enrollment in the two attendance zone schools. Create virtual program opportunities for secondary schools. And this didn't mean like an online school. We kind of kept it open. We had a lot of conversations around what virtual programming may look like. Move Charter School of Wilmington to an existing high school and reduce down to two attendance zone high schools. Expand Dickinson as a 6-12 IB magnet program and reduce down to two attendance zone high schools, which would be McKean and AI. The last pieces of our committee brainstorm. We're reducing down from eight to seven middle school programs because many of these things needed to go together. Move AI middle to AI high to create one 6-12 A to Z program. We had some conversation around capping Conrad and CAB as smaller enrollments. And then of course like Mr.Pruitt shared before we looked at the information about Warner and how the students kind of go to different places. We talked about the possibility of creating a K-8 attendance zone school at Warner and creating a K-12 attendance zone school at Warner. So, we talked about both. And then the last thing that we tossed around was the idea of allowing choice busing for all students to all schools. So, with that, I'm going to turn it over to one of my other committee members to take us through our next steps.

Shawn Snyder: Good evening. I'm Shawn Snyder. I'm the director of technology here in the school district. We invited Dr. Ammon and Dr. Heacock in to do some analysis and to offer us both some research and some statistical evaluations and analysis of our current facilities. So, let's take a look at a slide here where Dr. Ammon did a brief analysis of each one of the ideas to discuss five different domains. HR impact, transportation, tech, nutrition, facilities, and cost. He created a rating scale that was fairly broad but high, low or medium. Now, this is not a scientific study necessarily. It was an overview of what the analysis would yield. A high negative impact doesn't mean it's a bad idea or that we shouldn't consider it - just that we would need to be more thorough in our analysis and be prepared to mitigate any negative high impact. So, as you can see, there's the analysis right there. 

For example, the innovation center, a high HR impact because it would require significant staff moves, a high transportation impact because it would require busing during the day. It has a low tech and nutrition aspect cost to us because it would be moving materials around but generally providing the same services from a facility standpoint. It would be sort of a medium lift for us. We would have some retrofitting to do it all three of our high schools to accommodate these changes but it wouldn't be massive and the cost would probably be you know medium mid-range in that. Whereas compared to the MYP program over to Skyline if that were to be part of this a fairly low impact from all three of those. Obviously, if you're a teacher being moved, you feel the HR impact would be higher because it's affecting you personally, but overall, the analysis was that those were all moves that could be done with minimal impact to the overall school district.

Operations impact from various ideas. Once again, same idea. These are three other ideas that were discussed that range from a medium high or low impact. Let me go back to the last slide right there. Choice bussing was one that we talked about a lot. To kind of clarify what the challenges there are is the cost is very high. It's the only very high you're going to see on the entire spreadsheet. 

The research was provided by Dr. Corey Heacock who did some analysis to answer questions that came up through the process. One of the questions was are proficiency levels impacted by the size of a school? Dr. Heacock did some analysis of schools within Delaware. She did some research to try and determine if there was any definitive research about a magic number for the size of a school. That study doesn't really exist. 

But we did notice throughout the state that proficiency levels seemed to improve as school size increased to a maximum of 1500 students within our own state. Absences were lower in schools of up to 1400 students. Larger schools had higher rates of absenteeism and dropout. Increased school size over 1500 students seemed to correlate with lower reported feelings of engagement, connectedness and participation by students. 

She also did some research on economic outcome. Research on grade level configuration was inconclusive. If anybody wants to get a doctorate, please do a study on that because it doesn't seem to exist at this point. And then grade level configuration is typically based on student enrollment, building space, cost, and community influence. These tend to be the factors that lead to a decision about moving schools around, closing a school, opening a school. Generally, money tends to drive that decision. We have more options, thankfully. From an analysis of ideas, each idea was considered.  

Antonio Gomes: My name again is Antonio Gomes. I'm one of the members of the community that had the privilege and pleasure honestly to serve at this committee to really do an analysis. Honestly, I know there's been a lot of talk from everyone. I can say the fact that we were able to even come up this far in such a short period of time is astronomical to me. I know there's a lot to ask for. We talked a little bit about the data, right? We looked at the data, what the problem is. We had folks bringing in additional information for us to understand. What are the challenges? What are the opportunities that are out there and we brainstormed there. Honestly, we were a lot of people in that room with a lot of different ideas but we needed to narrow this down. Ultimately that's what we came up with. What are the things that we need to consider with all these great ideas that people have? Very different ideas. How do we consolidate that into something that's a little bit more manageable for us to ultimately come up with a resolution or a proposal for you guys. So we decided to look at all the ideas and kind of categorize them. Look at the relevance of the problem, the feasibility and the impact. Does this idea make sense to the core issues? We had a specific goal and objective for this committee. Did it meet it? What is the feasibility of implementing the solution? So we talked about just the analysis that we did. What's the cost? What does it take to make it happen? And then of course what is the impact to the community? Ultimately the ultimate goal. 

So we took all this information and the task was for us to all come together and decide hey let's narrow this down to four. What are the four things or four ideas that we came out there that we thought would be suitable for us to proceed and look into it a little bit further. And that's what we're looking at here. 

Here are the results of basically all of us coming up and deciding which ideas meant the most. As you can see, the innovation center was the one piece that stood out. But there's a couple things that we also decided during the conversation that could intermingle as well. So we didn't want to leave anything behind and we provided opportunity for folks to make their cases to really disclose why should we consider this idea or remove it altogether and we had the opportunity to discuss that which I think towards the end we all came to a consensus and took a vote of whether or not to exclude it which is where we kind of went to the next step. 

Maddie Reitemeyer  : My name is Mattie Reitemeyer. I am a school counselor at AI High School. I previously worked at Dickinson High School and for a couple years at AI Middle as a school counselor. So what I'm going to talk about is the audit that was presented to the committee. This is it. You can see it up here. And what was done is district looked at the CTE classes and asked sort of what stage are they in as far as what our goal is with the standard in teaching. So I'm just going to give an example. If you look at plant science and animal science, it met the standard. When you look at strategic goals and state standards for CTE, they're doing really well. If it's in red, they're still at the beginning stages. Some of the ones that are up there are brand new. So, it's not that they're poor programs, it's that they're only a year or two old and they're still getting off the ground. And then yellow would be in the middle. So, that's just to look at it. You can see a quick glance, McKean is further along than the other two high schools in a lot of their programs. 

This - I'm not going to take a lot of time on it. They put together some examples of schools that already have innovation centers within their district, but I think anyone that's interested should definitely check those out as standards and whatever the board decides to do, I'd really encourage you to look at other models as well. 

So kind of combining the two ideas, one question would be what is actually being offered at this innovation center if it were to go forward? And this would be some of the suggestions that came up based on programs that are already well underway. And then some areas where we don't have CTE. I think there was a mention of that in a public comment that there's areas that could be expanded too and they would look at that at the innovation center. 

So a big question that a lot of people have, I had it for sure, is what does it look like if we do this? So, this sounds like a big idea. It's great, but what are we actually doing day to day? And this is one idea that could potentially happen by the grade level.

So, your ninth graders at Dickinson and AI. What they would do is take a CTE exploration course. They do a couple weeks looking at each potential program that they could do. One thing that I would say definitely needs to happen if you're going to do that is get them to take a field trip over the innovation center and actually see these classes in session and what it would look like, what they get to do during the day. So that would be in ninth grade. They wouldn't commit to a program. Most ninth graders do pick a class and then they follow it through the next three years right now, and this would give them a time to explore it. 

In 10th grade, they would do their first year, but it would be one and a half credits. In 11th grade they would do their second year which would also be one and a half credits. So you're going to see a three-year program condensed down into two. But because they're spending more time in the class, they're still covering the same content. 

And then an idea with 12th graders would be some of them might move on to dual enrollment. I'm just going to give an example. If it was an allied health student, they might then go into something like anatomy and physiology at DelTech. So they're getting a credit, but they're still staying in the program that they want. Or you might have a student that would go out and actually do some work in the community in the program that they're studying. That's just an example. 

What would a student's day look like? I'm going to try and do a good job explaining this. I apologize in advance if I do not. One way that I think about it, because for me it makes a lot of sense, is if you moved kids by grade level. We said the 9th grade students, they're doing a CTE exploratory course. They'd have seven classes on their schedule. One of them would be that CTE in their home building. 

The next year you have your 10th grade students. In the morning they'll come to school, then they'll get on a shuttle bus. This would be at Dickinson and AI to go over to McKean and they would spend from 7:55 to 10:05 in that CTE course. So that's why it's one and a half credits because it's more minutes than would otherwise happen. They come back and they go to lunch. Then your afternoon students, they're at lunch while the other students are traveling back. 

So let's say it's 11th graders now. They're going to spend their afternoon at the innovation center. So they come in the morning, they're doing English and Math. They go to lunch and then they're going to get on the shuttle bus and they'll go over to the innovation center to do their CTE which would be their level two. So you have a large group of students traveling together. I'm just giving an example of how it could be. It could be half 10th and half 11th in the morning. It helps me think about it from a grade level standard. The morning students are doing their English and math. So, it's just a way to think about the schedule on a detailed level. There are others, but I think this is a clean way to think about it.  

Mark Pruitt: After brainstorming a relevance and impact analysis, asking for some more information, what might an innovation center look like? A counselor like Maddie did some work to give an idea. We then started to make some decisions. First of all, we looked at some virtual 6-12 programming. By unanimous consent, the committee agreed to go ahead and move forward with that as a recommendation that the district would further consider. We would not require anyone to take online courses but that would meet the needs of a family who was interested in that. That idea had no bearing on the other ideas. It had no impact on our current problem that we face. 

The next discussion involved the idea of reducing enrollment at CSS and CAB Calloway. 19 members, not one of them chose a tally mark for that. So by unanimous consent, we removed that from further consideration.

AI middle school to AI high school having a 6-12 attendance zone school did receive two tallies. Some discussion about that. I actually brought this up. This actually sort of memorializes the problem, right? When you take 500 middle school kids and 600 high school kids, you put them in a building. Now you've filled the building up and you've ensured that AI's high school population will never grow because there won't be any space to do that. So by unanimous consent we removed it from further consideration.

Dorrell Green: Mr. Pruitt, I think the thing to note is that’s the current issue right now at the John Dickinson school. We can't grow the high school portion because we've co-located middle schools. But then to look at the other issue around capping Conrad and CAB, inherently through the choice process, they're limited in their ability because you’ve got to be able to have specific cohorts to show that you have adequate programming in both of those schools. 

Mark Pruitt: It's a really good example, Dr. Green, of when Dickinson was at less than 600 students in its school. Hey, let's put a middle school there to try to get some of the high those middle schoolers to stay for the high school. Well, it worked. Now the building is at capacity, but we still have a top priority to let attendance zone students go to Dickinson. We have to let those students even by limiting IB choice students in the program. So it's a good example of what would happen if you did something similar to AI at AI high and AI middle. 

A lot of discussion and a lot of public comment about relocating the charter school of Wilmington. It received 4 tallies out of 19. After discussion, I made a motion to remove the idea due to not enough support by the committee. Further discussion ensued. The  motion was seconded because this was not unanimous. We did use a Robert's rules process for many of these and that was seconded. The motion passed 11-2, 11 yes and 2 abstain and the idea was removed from further consideration. 

Choice busing for all students received five tallies out of a possible 19. After a lot of discussion I did make a motion to remove the idea due to not enough support by the committee and discussion ensued. This is an interesting one. I don't think anyone doesn't want to take every student from their front door to where they want to go to school. So you're not really voting no because you don't think that's a good idea for kids.  But practically is it possible in a school budget? Is it possible with the number of buses you need, with the number of drivers you need, with the current driver shortage, which is corrected to a certain extent, but you know, it's just not a practical idea. 

Dorrell Green: And the local expense because a lot of those routes get approved by the state.

Mark Pruitt: Financially, obviously. Yep. Yep. Dr. Amman talked about that. That was an 11-2 to remove it from further consideration.

Now, we we’re down to just a few of our brainstorming ideas that had been discussed, talked about you could not have an innovation center at McKean and reduce down to two high schools and turn John Dickinson into a magnet program and reduce down. You had to make a choice there. A lot of discussion amongst these two. Ultimately, Miss Todd Dixon made a motion to move forward with the idea in the recommendation to move forward with the innovation center. Dr. Muffley seconded the motion and the motion passed 11 yes. Two people abstain from voting. 

The first part of it was removing Dickinson from further consideration.

Then the second part of that was to move forward with the innovation center. 

The next one was these two were sort of coupled. One of the ideas was big- we have too many middle schools. It's causing a vacuum at some of our current middle schools for programming and opportunity and access. One of it was a consolidation of middle school programs from 8 to 7. Another one existed moving the John Dickinson middle school program to Skyline. Both of those sort of fit together. After a lot of discussion, I made a motion to move forward with both ideas in the recommendation. This would allow for the increased high school enrollment needed at Dickinson High School. If you're going to move forward with one, the middle school has to move. The IB program has to move to another space. The motion was seconded by Mr. Leonard and all 12 members on the committee in attendance voted unanimously to move forward.

A lot of discussion about a K-8 program at Warner. Originally we were talking about K-12, and we removed that very early. Quite simply, it's not a facility for a high school. It doesn't have the athletic space, the outdoor space, the lab space, those kinds of things. But you know a lot of discussion about K-8 at Warner. We did feel like the idea contradicted with the goal of the committee which was to bolster enrollment at all of our schools. However because of concern around the city of Wilmington middle school attendance zones by unanimous consent. The committee agreed to include a future re-evaluation of middle school attendance zones, particularly as they relate to the Warner Elementary School community would be included in our final recommendation.

That brought us to what we sent out to the community at the beginning of June or right after the Memorial Day weekend.

We came up with three core principles that we put forward.Creating straight line feeder patterns that align high school attendance zones with existing middle school attendance zones. That we have balanced enrollment. Distribute students equitably across attendance zone high schools. That we have program equity. Ensure that all students regardless of high school have access to high quality academic and extracurricular programs. So that part of the recommendation was you know that we were put forward what we called our core principles as we move forward.

Two specific program changes. One, establish the Thomas McKean Innovation Campus. The committee recommended on May 21st that the Thomas McKean High School be reimagined as the Thomas McKean Innovation Campus through expanded partnerships with local colleges, universities, and the business community. This flagship hub will produce courses in CTE, industry standard credentialing courses and early college credit opportunities. 

As part of the change, a number of comprehensive high school attendance zones would be reduced from three to two. AI and Dickinson. These two comprehensive high schools would split the Red Clay high school attendance zones equally, allowing for increased enrollment and a more robust academic and extracurricular offerings. These two attendance zones better align with middle school attendance zones. We would then be able to use middle school attendance zones, where a middle school goes to a specific high school instead of being split to three high schools allowing for straight line feeder patterns and it would include a short shuttle bus transportation that would be provided from AI and Dickinson to the innovation campus. They would be there for one quarter of their program. We run on an AB schedule. So students would register for courses or do course selection for one quarter of their program at the innovation center.

Program change number two was to relocate the John Dickinson Middle Year's program to allow for increased high school enrollment at the John Dickinson School. The committee recommend recommended relocating the MYP middle school program from Dickinson to Skyline Middle School, allowing for a more balanced enrollment across middle schools. 

And finally, additional recommendations for future consideration of the district. Middle school attendance zones. Re-evaluate the middle school attendance zones especially as they pertain to the Warner elementary school community to improve feeder pattern continuity and equity particularly in that community and virtual high school programming. Explore the development of virtual high school coursework to expand flexibility and learning opportunities for red clay students. So that was where we were on May 21st. That was the recommendation that we put out to the community to collect their feedback in a survey. 

Tawanda Bond: So once we got to the point where we had all of our recommendations that we were preparing for the board, the committee came up with the idea to make sure that we had stakeholder engagement. So we embarked on two major pieces of stakeholder engagement. After our seven public meetings with public comment at all of our meetings, we had a June 10th community meeting that had Q&A. So, we were there for several hours, just open forum. We also conducted student focus groups and I'm going to talk a little bit through the student focus groups that we conducted to get student engagement and student feedback. Then after that you're going to hear a little bit from Mr. Jay Bastinelli about our community survey that was conducted by Hanover Research. 

So when we did our student focus groups, I'm going to give a kudos to my team on teaching and learning. We had Mr. Brian Maddox, the supervisor of science, as well as Mrs. Karen Ammon, our supervisor of instructional technology who conducted student focus groups on a really tight turnaround time working with our middle school and our high school principals. And really the big gist of it was looking at getting student input and student feedback around these three bullets. 

What CTE pathways do students wish were offered at their current school? 

What career affairs interest them the most? 

And what were their perspectives on the district's proposed CTE innovation hub? 

Now, at the bottom of some of these slides, you'll see some anecdotal notes. And these are truly from the mouth of the babes. And if you're there to hear Mrs. Ammon speak to the committee about the enlightened work that she did with the students, there was a lot of really good community conversation with the students. They went kind of off task a little bit when they were talking about their needs, their wants, their dreams with the CTE pathway idea with the innovation center. 

So this is our focus group demographic data. So you all have this information in front of you so you know who the participants were and our focus groups and this was the methodology. So we conducted it through Zoom. Each of them were one hour of course our moderators Mrs. Karen Ammon Mr. Brian Maddox and their focus areas were around CTE awareness, student interest, feedback on the proposed innovation center, equity, partnerships, and learning supports. And again, another anecdotal piece there for you to read from one of our AI high school students.

These are some of our key findings and over the next couple of slides, you’ll see some of the information that fell under these big buckets. We focused on innovation center course and pathway interest, professional college partner professional and college partnerships as well as learning environments and you'll see some of the themes that came out of the conversations with the students and again a student quote. 

When we talked about course and pathway interests these were some of the themes that came out from our middle schoolers and our high schoolers. The middle schoolers talked about how many of them only have four current pathways that match their student interests. Our high school students felt more access across schools would be valuable particularly for specific pathways like autotech, physical therapy, nursing, plant science, and animal science which Mrs. Wrightmyer shared in one of the previous slides about where we offer those at which of our schools. The kids talked about their willingness to travel. They opened up about shuttle transportation, some of their concerns about missing school-based opportunities, and they also talked about exploration matters. The middle schoolers really thought it would be pretty great to have a CTE exploratory experience where they could also have some access to that innovation center and preview pathways before they decide on one. 

The second big bucket was professional and college partnerships from our middle schoolers. They shared work experience and valued skill building things like time management. Our high school students were more vocal, they emphasized mentorship, networking, job readiness. They talked about entrepreneurship courses and mentor supported student businesses. They saw those as valuable. They wanted help with job searches and internships identified as a gap and an opportunity for our innovation center. And all of our students supported classroom visits from professionals, multiple speakers per field. That’s what they recommended and what they wanted. 

And then the last big bucket was learning environment. Of course, our students wanted and preferred a hands-on active learning over traditional instruction. High school students reported positive experiences in current CTE courses and work-based learning experiences. And then they had a lot of conversation highlighting the need for CTE programs to be more accessible with a focus on truly practical real world experiences that align to their learning styles. And they talked a lot about multilingual learners. And really again from the mouth of babes their concern and their value for bilingual support and they also recommended expanding it more into CTE classes. 

These are some of the recommendations that came from our student focus groups. They talked about outreach. They wanted to see a CTE fair for middle school students. Exploration offering CTE trial periods or exploratory courses for middle school students. Instructional design. They like shorter, engaging, hands-on project formats. Mentorship was a highlight. Expanding that access to career mentors, of course, MLL supports. This came up a lot. They wanted uh to ensure that we would have bilingual push-in teachers and CTE classrooms. They wanted high*interest pathways. There was a pathway conversation that we’re not currently offered at all of our high schools. The pathways. They wanted high-interest programs that are currently only offered at individual schools like automotive, nursing, and career prep. They want help with job searches, applications, as well as interviews. And now I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Jay Bastinelli to talk more about the community survey that was conducted.

Mark Pruitt: Pause at this point and say we are about 80% of the way through. It's a lot of information. It was a lot of work. Would anyone like to ask questions now or would we like to finish up and then ask questions? Finish. I know it's a lot of information but it's important information.  

Jay Bastianelli: My name is Jay Bastianelli. The first slide that I would like to share is we had 1,128 participants complete the survey. From the outside, you would think there's approximately 16,000 students in red clay. That's not a real high number. But if you look deeper, the last survey we sent similar to this was in regards to our strategic plan that Dr. Bond and her team worked very hard on. Only 500 people took that survey. So, more than twice as many took this. So, I think that says a lot about the passion people have for this committee and this potential plan. If you look closely at the survey participant background information, you will see who exactly filled this the majority were staff members followed by parent guardians. If you break it down even deeper in terms of the school, you're going to see the majority were instructional staff or teachers. Also looking a little deeper in terms of the survey participant background information. Just like we have at most our back to school nights in late September, elementary school always has the highest participation and that goes the same with this survey. The majority were elementary school parents or family members. In terms of feeder school attendance, it was most attended feeder schools and then a strong percentage not attending their feeder school. Some are unsure and you can also see the background information. The most was special education parents. In terms of participation background information the majority were white and the majority were female.

Then also looking deeper in terms of what did they feel most strongly about? What do they think was most important? 46% said ensuring all red clay students have access to quality college and career ready education. Even breaking it down deeper, you could look exactly how the community members felt, how the parents felt, and how the staff members felt. The highest percentage was having access to quality college and career programming. All right, so I'll turn it back over to Mr. Pruitt.

Mark Pruitt: After some general questions in the survey, it did ask a specific question about the two specific changes - the innovation center and the moving of the John Dickinson MYP program. You see that there were 51% somewhat supported or strongly supported the idea and 34% strongly opposed or somewhat opposed the idea. We then looked at that broken down disaggregated. 

We looked at the staff first. The district office 60% supported.  23% opposed. Elementary 60% supported, 20% opposed. Secondary schools a little closer 45% to 43%. But it is important to note and to be expected that the two schools, the staff at the two schools that were most directly impacted, their jobs will change. McKean High School and Dickinson, at least some of Dickinson's teachers, they are actually flipped and drove that number down. And I think that's to be expected. Those types of changes can be very difficult for our employees. So that makes sense. Move to parent totals. Very similar. 50% supported, 31% opposed. However, again, the most participants, and a flipped result between the McKean parents and the current McKean and current Dickinson parents. The AI Middle School was in there, but only four parents took that survey and three did oppose it. That was the community member results. 

We then looked at please say how much you oppose or support adjusting middle school feeder patterns to allow students at Warner to attend a feeder pattern closer to their home. 70% somewhat support or strongly support and only 7% opposed. So that was overwhelming support. Look at that disaggregated. It was similar. 

Dorrell Green: So, and just again for those in the earlier point that was made, when we talk about middle school for Warner specifically, they're split. Their cohort of fifth graders

either attend HB DuPont, which is the furthest part distance away, or they

attend Skyline Middle, which is the second furthest. 

Mark Pruitt: Then we asked them about virtual programming. 47% supported, 37% opposed. Look at that disaggregated. It is important to note that the educators supported that far more than parents, but also important to note that we're not requiring anyone to be involved in a virtual program. That would be by choice and didn't really impact the overall purpose of this committee. 

Dorrell Green: The other danger in that is if you say virtual program that means a lot of different things to a lot of different people too. So some assume virtual school. So again I think to unpack that a little. Why the committee left that on and didn't take that recommendation off. That's something that we can continue to look at especially post-covid in terms of learning options for students

Mark Pruitt: That would be the work moving forward you know if it were to be approved by the board.

Shawn Snyder: Part of the survey we collected comments from each one of the survey participants generated I think over 400 comments and questions digging through that data we leveraged some technology. We created an executive summary using some AI tools, chatGPT, and a few other ones to kind of take that massive amount of text and turn it into some more understandable data that we could put on some slides. This represents some of the main themes of those comments. Number one, there was general support for proximity-based schooling that came up over and over and over again. People would like the school to be near their house. The concerns about equity and diversity. That seemed to be a driving force. Actually was the charge of the committee. So, I'm glad that people were asking questions about that. Specific concerns related to McKean High School. That really I think crystallized some of the need to explain whatever decision we make thoroughly to the communities that it impacts, regardless of what decision is ever made. There will be work to do to explain whether it's this out of the box idea or whatever idea the board decides to move forward with. Impact on feeder patterns and program continuity. That was something that came up specifically from staff. Calls for stakeholder engagement. Several staff members emphasized the importance of ongoing communication with stakeholders, finding as many ways as possible to make sure that we have created opportunity for everybody's voice to be heard. Then finally, the last category was just kind of miscellaneous concerns and suggestions centered around transportation, staff assignments, building usage, many of the topics that we've covered throughout this presentation. Overall, the staff respondents demonstrated a thoughtful and engaged perspective on attendance zone revisions. They recognize benefits and challenges and surfaced those through the comments.  I also did an analysis of these comments using an AI formula that I developed along with a couple other people that looked at keywords and phrases in each one of the comments in the survey and described a negative, neutral, or positive attribution to those statements. Because when you're looking at this, it's easy to start to think, well, these are all negative comments or these are all positive comments. Really, the vast majority of the comments were questions that didn't have a negative or positive connotation. They just really didn't have all the information they wish they had. That made a lot of sense since we're in the process and not at the end of the process. So, that seemed right that we were proposing some things. An innovation center is not a thing that Delaware has done before. So, I would expect the majority of the people to have questions about what that looks like and how that works. Basically a tag was put on each one of them and then we counted them up and it explained based upon the response where that fell. So the most common themes of these were student needs and program availability, student attendance and community impact, quality of education at the innovation center, feeder patterns and school choice, middle years program and IB alignment. These are the most common words that appeared in comments associated with those topics.  

Mark Pruitt: We looked at data. We spent the entire June meeting looking at data. The student focus group data and the survey data that went out to the community. We analyzed that information. We left time at the end to get into small groups. And the bottom line, the overriding question was did the data compel us to edit the recommendation? We got into small groups and looked at those three questions.  Each of the three groups gave an update. I think there was overall sentiment from each of the groups was that the overall survey participation was lower than the committee had hoped. While for red clay, it was a good survey result, it was more than double our strategic plan survey, but still only 1100 surveys for a rather large community and and also that some survey respondents did not understand the recommendation like a lot of the questions in the comments had to do with like where is my kid going, are they going to be there - are they going to be here? Further explanation of that.

Then we allowed for two motions to amend. The first motion was to provide the current recommendation to the board, but also recommend that the board not take action until October 2025 to allow for better community understanding of the recommendation and more engagement from the community and stakeholders. There were 14people. We did operate on a quorum. So we needed 10 votes to move anything forward to the recommendation. There were 8 yes votes and 6 no votes. The motion did not pass.

Then there was a second motion to amend which was to engage in a campaign with stakeholders to educate and gather feedback on the current recommendation and then re-engage the committee and make a recommendation to the board in the fall. There were 4 yes votes, 10 no votes. That motion did not pass.

Questions? 

Aje English: I have a question. I didn't want to forget it. I have a comment about the last slide about the two motions that did not pass, but I don't want to forget my first comment that I had that was regarding the feedback and the survey results that 1100 number that you stated that you provided from Hanover. In that number, does that include any of our city schools or families or we do have that information?

Mark Pruitt: Disaggregated by each school for family. I can't pull that now. I can certainly get that for you. 

Aje English: Okay, yeah. I would like to be able to see that just because I know that Warner obviously is one of the city schools, and there are a number of schools in this plan that are going to be affected by this. So I would just like to, as the person with the city seat, I would like to see what their feedback is on that. As a city mom of a student  that is in the Red Clay School District. 

Mark Pruitt: And I agree that if we move forward, the recommendation says to look again at the middle schools, particularly as it relates to Warner. I think you have to get feedback from that specific community because certainly it won't be enough. It's 1100 surveys divided by - if it's evenly distributed - it's 28 programs, right? 

Aje English: So, my next comment would just be to say that I would be interested in with my fellow board members here to kind of further discuss motion number one regarding the opportunity to distribute the survey and additional time, just to see if we could get feedback. I don't know if there's an opportunity to do that, if I would have make a motion for that. Um, I'm open to discussing that further after everyone else asks their questions. 

Jose Matthews: I can weigh in on that. I'm of the opinion that moving forward with this doesn't mean that we're now going to stop engaging with the community. We're always going to engage with the community. It's an ongoing process. So the work here certainly isn't finished whatsoever. Really, tonight's recommendation allows us to get started in that work. Then it really is incumbent on the board to make sure that, as the governing body, that we make sure that we're receiving our monthly updates but then in addition to that - setting the direction to the district to what we want to see. That's certainly a discussion that we can have at our upcoming workshop. There's definitely going to be a lot of communication that's going to need to be happening and a lot of engagement that's going to be happening. It's our job to make sure that it does happen moving forward. But tonight's recommendation allows us to be able to initiate the process. But unless we provide the go-ahead to the district to be able to initiate that work, then we're really just putting ourselves at a standstill, right? 

Aje English: So as a rebuttal, Mr. Pruitt, if we do in fact approve this and move this forward, what is the next step? 

Mark Pruitt: I think the next step would to be come up with a planning document of what needs to be done between tomorrow or whenever it was passed, and backmap from a timeline which really needs to be done. The board had talked about having this new program operational in August-September of 27. To do that, the work really needs to be done by October of 26.  Because we needed to get the information out to allow families to participate in school choice at these new programs. That's really our deadline. What would that look like -  Whether it's engaging with RCEA regarding teacher movement if you're moving English teachers and CTE teachers…

Dorrell Green: and that would all be part of a part of that process. I think from November and the board setting forth and I just want to acknowledge the committee and the committee members because the board gave us a charge to establish a committee and really look at again those three broad areas in terms of enrollment balance, look at programming, and being mindful of equity. And as we've heard through many public commenters and different things, we here for a reason because too often in our district, we looked at situations in isolation and never looked at the district comprehensively just in terms of how we look at the Red Clay consolidated school district. And we've created options. We've created opportunities and forced ourselves into a corner where if we don't control the destiny and the vision of the district, something or someone else likely will. And so I'll just want and this isn't the buy all end all in terms of the recommendation that the committee put forward, but I just want to acknowledge the work of the committee because when we look at balance or just taking the John Dickson school situation as an example, we co-located a middle school program where now we currently actually have an underenrolled middle school and rather than look at it comprehensively across the district as a report we can look at it in isolation from one individual school perspective understanding that there is a domino effect that ultimately impacts a lot of our schools whether that's through magnet whether that's through choice so again I just think we're eventually going to have to address it through feeder pattern processes and in and alignment because again our middle schools and secondary schools are splintered and that really doesn't provide an opportunity to have community across the district. 

Aje English: Well, I don't want to and not to cut you off, I just have one last comment. I'd be remiss if I didn't say that I appreciate all the work that the committee has done because I do appreciate it. And I know that the previous board, we voted to set this plan in motion. And I'm not saying that we don't continue on with the plan. What I am saying is that in my role as an individual board member, my first priority is my role as a parent. Not just of my son in the district, but all of the children in the district. So I just want to make sure that in the timeline that we are still working to attempt to accomplish that we make the decisions properly and if we need to make adjustments that we can keep that in mind that we should make the adjustments and not make hasty decisions just because of the previous timeline that we put in place. When families select homes, they select their homes based on the schools and everything else that is provided in these communities. And so I just want to be sure that we are making a proper decision. So that's my final comment. 

Vic Leondard: I just want to say part of the charge is also to form another committee if we go ahead with this advisory committee. That was part of the charge. Correct? 

Mark Pruitt: That was amended out of it. So the initial one had two committees running. One ran through November and then the other one…Well we would certainly need to align feeder patterns but with this recommendation new attendance zones would be relative. The idea would be to have an entire middle school and you'd have to just make sure that there was equal enrollment as much as we could according to our attendance zone middle schools. So that work you're not parsing out neighborhoods or arguing, you're not doing the kinds of things that often you do when you look at it. You're just simply slotting in four middle schools into two high schools if this were adopted. 

Dorrell Green: So it's straight line feeders from our middle to our high schools which we currently don't have as he indicated. If you're going from Warner, you're going to two different and then those students are being splintered across three different high schools. So the eighth grade class at AI Middle actually still have three attendance zone high schools.  

Devon Hynson: I guess Jose's response to her question basically superimposes a requirement that we pass it to be allowed to get more information from the community. Because her question was germaine, but was specific that she wanted to get more information from the community and get more information feedback from the community and you're saying well this allows us to do that. 

?: Not necessarily. 

Devon Hynson: So let's just say that if we say we want to postpone it and give ourselves 45 to 60 days to be able to get to the community, and find out what they they're saying because the only person I've heard that are objective voices that weren't on the committee, that were parents of kids that are in the schools do not agree with this.

Jose Matthews: So, I'll -

Devon Hynson: Hold up, hold on. So my point is I don't know why that's being taken off the table, an opportunity to get to the community and get more information from them and what they feel about this plan. 

Jose Matthews: So, let me reiterate what I stated. What I'm stating is that passing this doesn't inhibit our ability to continue to work with the community. In fact, I think that this would help us continue to work with the community in forming what we want to see out of these plans. But passing this vote tonight does not inhibit us from continuing, which I know that we will continue to do as we have always done, making sure that we're

engaging with all of our stakeholders. And it's incumbent to us as representatives of the community -

Devon Hynson: Absolutely.

Jose Matthews: to be able to do that work as well and bring that information from the conversations that we're having with parents and stakeholders, and people that we represent at this table. So, a lot of that responsibility falls not just on the district and their outreach, but to us and our respective office. But it doesn’t inhibit that.

Devon Hynson: Well, I want to be clear. What does passing it tonight do?

Jose Matthews: It allows us to give the district a charge that we have appropriate amount of planning because there's a lot of work that's going to be happening over the next year. And in order for this to be successful, we have to make sure that we're giving our operations side of it. So, right now it's caught up in governance. That's our barrier right now. Operations can't do their work and planning unless we give them the directive to do so. So the charge of the board that directive in the mission

Devon Hynson: Let's just say we pass it and then the community says no, we don't like it. 

Jose Matthews: Then we can amend it. I mean there's nothing here that isn't amendable. There isn't. And I can tell you, Devon, from other initiatives that this board has done, we're constantly evolving plans, but we can't get to that operational piece, and that planning piece, until we've released it from governance and have given the charge. But we can continue to make amendments and as the community vocalizes, you know, the things that they want to see within the programming or the things that they want, you know, and I can tell you I even have additional ideas on my own. For one, I can give an example. I would love for the innovation center to expand their program. I think a lot of the list of programs that we have for now is great - but I think there are different, bigger, broader ideas. But it starts with planting the seed and we can't expand services - like I would love to see plumbing, I would love to see electrical programming. I would like to see HVAC, but unfortunately we're not at that point yet. And I think we definitely could expand and grow something really unique and really powerful. But until we release it from our governance perspective, operations will not be able to do their job and making sure that they can continue their work to plan for what is going to be an incredibly busy year. 

Aje English: And to his point, Mr. Hynson, it has to come before the board. It does have to come before the Board. So there will be, like Mr. Matthews stated, opportunities for us to flush this out at the workshop and us to continue to communicate with Dr. Green or Mr. Pruitt and his staff. And so we are voting to set this in motion - or not - but there's also an opportunity for us to continue to flush the details out. And that was the point of me posing my questions, not to disrupt, but just to ensure that all voices are being heard. 

Jose Matthews: And I want to make sure - the plans aren't binding yet. I mean, we have not approved a plan yet, but we haven't also allowed and given authority to Dr. Green and the district to be able to move forward with the planning process. So, nothing here to that level of detail is going to bind us. 

Devon Hynson: So, what does it say? Can I read what it says because I don't have a computer.

Jose Matthews: No, no, no, you're fine. 

Vic Leonard: Well, while we're waiting, Dr. Nesmith has a question online.

Kecia Nesmith: Thank you. Thank you, President Leonard. Uh, sorry. I'm sorry I can't be there. Um, so a couple things I just want to say to kind of piggyback on what Ms. English has said. I've been on the committee. I attended six of the seven meetings and I really appreciated all of the hard work. I have said that we need to include on the -if not the committee - the guests in the meeting of constituents. And we did not do that and it has been repeated over and over and over again. So to the point that oh we can get more input later, we could have gotten the input during. And so to that point, I do not believe that we did our due diligence to fully engage the community that would be the most affected. And secondly, when Ms. English said about when people buy their homes, that's a big, big deal. And so yes, we want equity. Yes, we want access, but to what extent will we compromise the trust of the community to get there? I believe that we should we should not make haste because we might waste an opportunity to make it really good. That is the end of my comment.

Vic Leonard: Any other comments? 

Kecia Nesmith: There's no motion on the floor. This was a presentation. We're not even under action items. This was a presentation.

Jose Matthews: Dr. Nesmith, I acknowledge the error. Thank you for pointing that out.  

 ⏯ 2:53:25 - 2:56:37

Dorrell Green: It is the recommendation that the Red Clay School Board approve the recommendation of the Secondary Attendance Zone Enrollment and Programming Committee as submitted.

Jose Matthews: So moved Jose Matthews 

Susan Sander: second Susan Sander.

Vic Leondard: It has been properly moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? 

Kecia Nesmith: I have a question. So the recommendation - it was two recommendations that weren't passed by the committee. So what is the recommendation?

Dorrell Green: So I think based on the committee there was the unanimous vote back in May that the committee decided - In the June meeting, it was my understanding from the committee was they voted not to make any amendments to those motions. So it's the original recommendation that came before the committee and the last meeting. Again my understanding based on the committee was that they voted to not make any amendments to those original unanimously-voted recommendations.

Kecia Nesmith: Was that on May 1st because I don't know that we had enough people there to be able to make that recommendation properly. I don't know if that's correct or not.

Dorrell Green: I believe that was the May 21st meeting if I'm not mistaken, Dr. Nesmith. 

Mark Pruitt: We had voted item by item to come up with a recommendation on May 21st. That is the recommendation that went out to the community. It was also the recommendation that was used with the focus group of students. We then took that information, looked at that information at the June meeting. We then had an opportunity to amend the recommendation. We did not get 10 votes to amend the recommendation. And so that's where we stood at the end of the process.

Vic Leonard: Any other comments?

Kecia Nesmith: I'm good. Thank you. 

Vic Leonard: Shall we go for a vote? Okay. Um, Miss Stevens, please call a vote.

Miss English, yes. Mr. Henson, no. Mr. Matthews. Yes. Dr. Nesmith, no. Miss Sander, yes. Miss Twardus, yes. Mr. Leonard, yes. Five Yes. Two No. 

Motion passes.

🎙️Presentation to the Board: Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming July 9, 2025 

• 📄Red Clay Attendance Zone and Programming Committee Recommendation to the School Board For convenience, the full text of the document is typed below. 

Red Clay Attendance-Zone & Programming Committee Current Recommendation to the School Board 

Core Principles 

• Alignment of Attendance-Zones: Create straight line feeder patterns that align high school attendance zones with existing middle school attendance-zones. 

• Balanced Enrollment: Distribute students equitably across attendance-zone high schools. 

• Program Equity: Ensure that all students, regardless of high school, have access to high-quality academic and extracurricular programs. 

Program Change #1: Establish the “Thomas McKean Innovation Campus” 

The committee recommends that Thomas McKean High School be reimagined as the Thomas McKean Innovation Campus through expanded partnerships with local colleges, universities, and the business community. This flagship hub will provide coursework in the following areas: 

• Career and Technical Education (CTE) 

• Industry-standard credentialing programs 

• Early college credit opportunities 

As part of this change: 

• The number of comprehensive high school attendance-zone schools would be reduced from three to two: Alexis I. duPont High School and The John Dickinson School. 

• These two comprehensive high schools would split the Red Clay high school attendance-zones equally, allowing for increased enrollment and more robust academic and extracurricular offerings. 

• These two attendance-zones better align with middle school attendance-zones, allowing for straight line feeder patterns from middle school to high school. 

• Short shuttle bus transportation would be provided from AI High and Dickinson to the McKean Innovation Campus for career, technical, and early college coursework. 

Program Change #2: Relocate the John Dickinson Middle Years Program (MYP) 

To allow for increased high school enrollment at The John Dickinson School, the committee recommends relocating the MYP middle school program from Dickinson to Skyline Middle School, allowing for a more balanced enrollment across the middle schools. 

Additional Recommendations for Future Consideration 

• Middle School Attendance-Zones: Reevaluate middle school attendance-zones, especially as they pertain to the Warner Elementary School community, to improve feeder pattern continuity and equity. 

• Virtual High School Programming: Explore the development of virtual high school coursework to expand flexibility and learning opportunities for Red Clay students.

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee webpage

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Meeting Rolling Slides

📊Results from Hanover Survey District Summary

📊Results from Hanover Survey Raw Data

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:05:10

   1. • Jenny Howard (parent): Urged the Board to reconsider the Secondary Attendance Zone proposal, arguing long-term uneven district investments in magnet and charter programs contributed current challenges.

2. Board Committee Report
   ⏯ 0:49:55

   1. • Board Member Kecia Nesmith provided an update on the Attendace Zone and Secondary Programming Committee; the proposal to create an Innovation Center and reduce to two comprehensive high schools did not receive a majority vote at the committee level, emphasized the need for broader stakeholder and student voice before a final recommendation comes to the Board.

⏯ 0:05:10

Jenny Howard: Good evening, members of the Board. I keep hearing the same questions in the community regarding the Attendance Zone committee. Why are we being punished? And if McKean is thriving, why disrupt it? But let's be honest, none of this is a punishment. And it isn't AI, McKean, or Dickinson's fault. What we're facing today is the result of years of uneven investment and inaction by the Red Clay School District. For decades, the district knew AI's enrollment was sliding. And yet, during that time, it chose to invest heavily in selective programs, expanding magnets, and even opening two charter schools under its own umbrella. Schools like CAB, Conrad, and the two Red Clay authorized charters were all positioned for success while AI was allowed to decline. All four of these schools have exclusive enrollment requirements that many students simply can't meet, effectively excluding large segments of our community. These choices weren't neutral. They reshaped opportunity across the district and left comprehensive schools like AI to absorb the consequences. Some are blaming Delaware's choice law, but let's be clear, choice didn't create this problem. Leadership did. Through how and where we invested. Families choose schools based on access, opportunity, and outcomes. When those aren't equitably available, enrollment shifts. And that's not about choice. It's about uneven planning and support. And now it seems like the district, instead of maybe trying to attempt to right these wrongs, the current proposal is pitting communities against each other. All three high schools are being fundamentally reshaped. Yet only AI is labeled the problem. We're told the model in Cecil's district, Cecil County's technical school is the star model, but that center was built with broad community excitement. Their funding structure is different and their success wasn't born from scarcity or fear of loss. Red Clay's plan right now feels zero sum. Dickinson feels the race. McKean feels punished and AI feels blamed. And that's not how you build trust. Let's name another real equity issue. Red Clay has lost valuable resources year by year after year by allowing the Charter School of Wilmington to pay far less than its fair share for space in the Wilmington campus. That imbalance is real. It has financial consequences and it's part of how we got here. So, I urge the committee, go back to the drawing board, engage every stakeholder, put all viable options on the table, and take a hard look at how our charter and magnet structures have impacted enrollment. Only through transparency, fairness, and real community voice can we create a high school model that truly serves every Red Clay student. I thank you for your time tonight.

⏯ 0:49:55

Kecia Nesmith: I'll get the report. So I just want to say first and foremost, thank you to all of the committee members who have been participating this entire year to Mr. Pruitt and his team. It has been a journey and I think that you know sometimes we want things really quick and we can't really get them that way but I will say that it has been structured in a very thoughtful way where we gave input and ideas and there was no idea not shared that we didn't consider. We went through the democratic process of determining and discussing what are some options to reach the goals which is to ensure equitable programming and access across our high schools and middle schools. And so with that, you know, Red Clay is the biggest school district in the state of Delaware. And I think we had a daunting task to work together to come up with those ideas. And in that time, it was great to have community members participate, board members, teachers, and administrators and share their perspectives around what we believe would be the best path forward to address some of the concerns around enrollment and attendance zones. We want to ensure that all students have equitable access to programs. And so with having school choice in our state and and making sure that you know everybody gets what they want or can get what they need, sometimes that stratifies our our schools and makes it a little bit more difficult to run programs to the highest extent. And so there were many discussions around where we would be going. And one of the the last recommendation that was on the table at the committee level was to create an innovation center and reduce to two comprehensive high schools so that all students would have access to CTE and that is curriculum and technical education. It's not VoTech. It's having access to many different programs around careers and technical education. We also looked at, well, how would we do that with space? And so, a big discussion was around potentially moving the middle year's IB program to Skyline. We did hear a lot from the public around their concerns. We sent a survey out, the district sent a survey out to families and we had 1,158 respondents. We do have over 16,000 students about 15 plus thousand. They conducted focus groups with middle schoolers and high schoolers and they gave some really salient points around what they think they should have school look like. They are our future. They will be the ones who will take us to the next level. And so there was quite a respectful debate at last night's meeting around whether to move forward with those recommendations. 

And so we had I think it was 14 members present and we did not get a majority vote for that. So that will be coming to to the Board next month. But I really appreciate the efforts and the respect that each of the members gave each other and sharing their opinions. And I do believe this was some of the consensus was that we need to obtain additional information through participation from different stakeholder groups that were not equitably represented in the survey and to have an effort to get that information. And I don't know what the committee will bring forth finally, but that is kind of where we are. And so, it's difficult, but I do believe that we will get to a great decision that will have our students in mind. A lot of times we make decisions based on what adults want and what adults need, but we don't always think about the students at the first and foremost. And I'm not saying that we're negligent. I'm just saying that that's something that we need to highlight. I'm going to piggyback on the WLC Symposium because today I was I was there and it and it made me think about our committee meeting last night and there were students there on a panel and they shared their perspectives and they were, you know, out of the mouths of babes. They said the truth about how they felt and what they wanted. And I think that we can learn from that and be more intentional around getting that student voice whether that means we have to do some unorthodox things in terms of engaging families in different communities who have different challenges of being involved in schools you know everybody has their own thing that they do but it was very telling today hearing those students voices and they weren't from Red Clay they were from a different district but I think that's where some of the members of the committee are steering towards and I know Mr. Pruitt will give his report next month and that concludes my report. 

📊Results from Hanover Survey District Summary

📊Results from Hanover Survey Raw Data

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee webpage

May 21, 2025 Meeting Materials 

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Meeting Rolling Slides May 21, 2025

📹Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee May 21, 2025 Recording

📋Secondary Attendance-Zone & Programming Committee May 21, 2025 Meeting Minutes For convenience, the full meeting minutes are typed below. 

May 21, 2025 / 6:00 PM / RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 Zoom Meeting 

(For public only. Committee members are in person.) 

1 Attendance/Welcome Thomas Brucker, Emily Carroll, Amin Farooqui, Val Gould, Vic Leonard, Jose Matthews, Jodi Muffley, Kecia Nesmith, Mark Pruitt Jr , Madeleine Reitemeyer, Eric Sanford, Kendra Todd-Dixon, Reggie Worlds Mr. Leonard made a motion to begin the meeting, seconded by Mr. Farooqui. Motion passed. 

Agenda Items 

• Public Comment - None 

• Approve Minutes from May 1st.

  • Motion made to accept the minutes as submitted by Mr. Worlds, seconded by Mr. Leonard. Motion passed. 

• The Committee’s Charge/Goal - Mr. Pruitt 

• Meeting Norms - Mr. Pruitt 

• Tentative Timeline - Mr. Pruitt 

• A Review of May 1st - All 

• Additional Data Requests - Mr. Pruitt shared data on current CTE enrollment and provided logistical examples- bell schedule, shuttle bus, class schedule, attendance zones- of what an innovation center could look like. 

• Refining Ideas and Developing a Recommendation - All 

  • Ms. Todd-Dixon made a motion to recommend reducing down by one A-Z high school and create the Thomas McKean Innovation Campus. The motion was seconded by Dr. Muffly. Motion passed with 11 yeas, 2 abstain. 

  • Mr. Pruitt made a motion to recommend consolidation of middle school programs from 8 to 7. Moving the John Dickinson Middle School(MYP) program to Skyline to allow for increased high school enrollment in the two attendance Red Clay Consolidated School District 1 zone schools. This would also include a recommendation to review the middle school attendance zones moving towards straight line feeder patterns with Warner elementary in mind. This motion was seconded by Mr. Leonard. The 12 members in attendance voted unanimously(one member left the meeting early reducing the number of votes by one).

• Preparing for Community Feedback - All. 

  • Mr. Pruitt reviewed the draft survey and focus group timeline with the committee. It was suggested that we use a QR code for the survey and send it home with students in their communication folders(elementary) and distribute it widely. 

• Adjusting our Timeline - It was discussed possibly moving the June 17th meeting back to be held between June 17th - July 2nd if more time was needed to get the results of survey information to gather community feedback. 

• Public Comment - None 

• Adjourn - Dr. Muffley made a motion to end the meeting, seconded by Mr. Matthews. Motion passed. 

• Action Items 

  • Send out surveys to solicit community feedback. Review results at the next meeting. 

Next Meeting June 17 @6pm at RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 

This meeting is open to the public. The draft meeting minutes will be posted on the district’s website, redclayschools.com, within 3 business days of the meeting.

▼Full Transcript Below

⚠️ ATTENTION: Mobile Users 📱 This video is stored on Google drive and app may not open to timestamp. Advance to time marker or long-press link to "Open in Browser"

Audience Questions & Comments

⏯ 1:06:34-2:24:03 

• • • How did the committee evaluate the impact of bus suspensions on students with disabilities; why was integrating magnet programs into comprehensive high schools not considered.

    • Lack of confidence in handling transportation effectively

    • Will the MYP remain a small program within Skyline, or is there an intention to transition all of Skyline into a Middle Years Program?

    • Disparities in offerings are not due to Delaware Choice law, or student ability, but due to district structures

    • How will the proposed plan address resource imbalances between Red Clay’s traditional and magnet high schools, ensure under-resourced neighborhoods are equitably

    • If AI High School's declining enrollment was originally the reason the committee was formed was the underlying cause of decline ever investigated?

    • Are all traditional high school students required to complete CTE credits?

    • Concerned about students' potential loss of instructional time due to busing to another building.

    • Concern about segregation of students according to academic vs career targeted pathways  

    • Who originally suggested the Innovation Center, and was the idea initiated by a district employee?

    • Worry about student transportation, and afternoon sports.

    • How will the Innovation Center help equalize AP course offerings at Dickinson and AI duPont?

    • Will Skyline still offer Spanish immersion?

⚠️ ATTENTION: Mobile Users 📱 This video is stored on Google drive and app may not open to timestamp. Advance to time marker or long-press link to "Open in Browser"

⏯️Mark Pruitt: Good evening, and welcome to the Secondary Attendance Zone and Programming Committee community update for the Red Clay School Board. My name is Mark Pruitt. I was on the committee for the past six months, and I'm going to introduce you to some other members shortly. I wanted to just give an outlook that a lot of work, a lot of effort, has gone into the past six months and a brief summary of what you'll see here tonight.

We plan to give you a brief summary of our data considerations, analysis, research, and how we made our decisions to come up with the current recommendation. After we get through those slides, we intend to stay and answer all of your questions as best we can, so it'll be a question and answer at the end. This is not a Board meeting in the public; this is for the public. Public comment won't be necessary because you'll be able to speak at the end, and we will respond to you at the end.

You could advance two slides please, Beth. Important to note that this is going to be a summary of our work over the past six months. We have a committee web page at the Red Clay Consolidated School District's website, which includes details of the committee and its work, including a meeting schedule, committee members, meeting agendas, and meeting minutes. I highlighted and linked the rolling slides; all six meetings to date are on one slide deck, so you could look through just a ton of information. As well, you could look at the video recordings of every meeting, the data considerations, and other supporting documents that we went through since January.

I will say at this point I'd like to introduce some members of the committee. First, Beth Jefferson is the administrative assistant; she's done a lot of work in the evenings with the committee over the past six months. A few of the members offered to assist in this presentation, and so I would like to introduce Dr. Jodi Muffley, who will come up to the microphone for a slide or two a little later in the evening. She is a nursing/health allied health teacher at AI duPont High School. Mr. Jay Bastianelli, principal at HB duPont Middle School—I’m at Brandywine Springs. Shawn Snyder is the Director of Technology for the Red Clay Consolidated School District, and Dr. Tawanda Bond is the Senior Director of Teaching and Learning for the Red Clay Consolidated School District.

We do have a couple of other members in attendance that I'd like to introduce. Miss Emily Carroll just joined us in the back; she is a science teacher at McKean High School. Mr. Antonio Gomes is a member of the public, a parent in our school district who's been with us for the past six months. And you can see the 19 people that served on the committee. That committee is outlined through Board policy and the number of different stakeholder groups that are to join the committee.

Additionally, we have two of our three Board members who served on the committee. Mr. Vic Leonard is here this evening; Dr. Kecia Nesmith is here this evening. And we also have two Board member-elects: Miss Beth Twardus will join the School Board in July, and just joining us is Mr. Devon Hynson, sitting in the back, School Board member-elect. Finally, this evening, our superintendent will join us to talk about a slide or two; Dr. Dorrell Green is here as well. We've got a group here in person; we're much larger online—60—so we're much larger online, so people are engaging with the work. At this time, I'd like to invite Dr. Nesmith to just welcome everyone to the meeting.

⏯️8:02 Kecia Nesmith: Good evening. I am very happy to see many of you here. Our committee has been working hard to take all of the input that we can to make sure that our students have access to multiple opportunities, and we really, really value the input of the community. And so if you're online, share out the link to other members of the Red Clay community, and thank you all who were able to come here today. Hopefully today you'll get insight into the thinking of the committee and then be able to ask very good questions and offer any ideas that you have. Welcome.

Mark Pruitt: Before we move forward with the committee's work, I wanted to note that you will be able not only to ask questions at the end of this meeting, but we launched a survey last Thursday. That survey is still open. I'm assuming some of you who joined the meeting, whether in person or at home, have waited to complete the survey; we really appreciate that coming out to get more informed. There will be a QR code at the end of the slide so you have access to the survey. The survey closes at midnight on Thursday, or it's through Thursday.

Okay, so at the November 2024 School Board meeting, the Red Clay Consolidated School District School Board voted to create a committee to evaluate the enrollment, programming, and attendance zones of Red Clay secondary schools and make recommendations to them at the July 2025 Board meeting. In doing so, the committee asked that we consider a strong and balanced enrollment across schools, that we consider the impact of attendance zone changes and alignment of those boundaries to existing K-8 attendance zones when possible. In fact, create straight-line feeders when possible to provide equitable access to a quality education for all of our students, all of our secondary school students in this instance. And when we reported back to them, report back on the advantages and challenges of our recommendation options through data analysis, community feedback, and research.

They gave us a scope for the work, which was data analysis, legal and policy review, stakeholder engagement—which is a little bit backloaded; we felt as though we needed to have a draft recommendation before we fully engaged. Certainly, we held the meetings in public and had public comment, but we really have dug into stakeholder feedback over the past couple of weeks—and a recommendation report. Resources available to the committee were data specialists; certainly utilized them. Legal counsel if needed. We had a guest speaker, our Chief Operating Officer Dr. Ted Ammon, spoke on the impact on transportation, facilities, and finance. And we also had at our disposal the University of Delaware's Center for Applied Demography and Survey Research.A quick overview of our meetings, when our meetings were held: again, both the agendas and the minutes are posted on the website. You see the work we did, and you're going to hear that a little more throughout the evening.

 ⏯️ 11:27 Mark Pruitt: First thing we did at our January meeting was look at data. And when I think we're up over 150 slides in a rolling slide deck for six minutes, how to reduce that down to a summary was very challenging over the past couple of weeks in creating this presentation. But I really tried to look at what were the key points and key takeaways the committee found.

The first were that K through 8 schools, elementary schools, and middle schools—those attendance zones were redone in 2015. They are very concise in nature, meaning that they are bounded by geography and they have straight-line feeders, meaning three or four elementary schools feed into an attendance zone middle school. And you see our middle school boundaries: Stanton on the southern tip of the map; AI Middle School to the west all the way up to the Pennsylvania boundary; HB duPont Middle School, including Hockessin; and then Skyline on the western side there. Additionally, there are two carveouts in our attendance zones, one being for Skyline Middle School, which takes a large section of the city of Wilmington in light blue there, and then two dark blue areas for—one being on the west side of Wilmington for HB and another one being on Lancaster Avenue for HB Middle School.

What you see in green are our high school attendance zones, which were last modified in 2002. And there is absolutely no rhyme or reason because there was no consideration given when the K through 8 boundaries were attendance zones were revised in 2015. So you see the McKean feeder in somewhat the middle of the district cutting through all four middle school attendance zones. There is no straight-line feeder, no semblance of a straight-line feeder there. You see AI High School, obviously of the largest area of AI Middle School, but not all of AI Middle School—not a lot of housing, not a lot of parcels out there, large properties, golf courses, farming areas. That loops around and captures part of HB Middle School. And then you see again the city of Wilmington, which is all three high schools have some of the city of Wilmington: AI High a portion of the west side, McKean High School a portion of the west side of Wilmington and a portion of the north side of Wilmington near Market Street, and then Dickinson High School a portion of the north side of Wilmington north of that McKean portion. So that's how we currently exist.

Next slide. What that creates is a lack of continuity in vertical articulation between middle schools and high schools. So you see that each of our schools pulls from at least three of our middle schools, and that's AI and Dickinson, and McKean has a new community being created by all four of our middle schools. I want you to digest that for a minute. It's a lot, I know. This can be dense information if you're seeing it for the first time. This slide deck will be posted tomorrow morning.

Next slide. All right, the next piece that we looked at is the issue of the number of seats we have to offer our students and the number of students that we have to sit in those seats. Because we are a choice state where students can choose to fill out a state choice application for any school, and if that school is not at capacity or not at least 80% capacity, we must allow that student to attend that school. What you see goes back—and that is really small, but you have two dates there: 2003 and 2025. All right, the key takeaways I'll go to first. High school enrollment between 2003 and 2025 has grown by 12%, but high school seats have grown by 26% over that same period as we have added two new schools since that time period. The school district charters the Delaware Military Academy starting in 2004 and Conrad Schools of Science in 2007. What that has created is our high school capacity numbers sit currently at 83%. Set another way, we have 1,000 more seats in our school district in our high schools than we have students to fill those seats. So at any given time over the past 20 years, one of our three attendance zone schools has been in a difficult situation of being significantly underenrolled: McKean High School on coming up on 20 years ago; Dickinson High School about nine, 10 years ago; AI High's precipitous decline, which has gotten some articles in news media over the past year, has dropped down to, I think they sit currently at about 575. So that is—that's that—that is—we spent a lot of time on this information. Again, if you go to the website, you'll see a lot more slides, a lot more infographics to go along with it.

Next slide. What we know is that for the most part, while we did get a bump in enrollment when we opened Conrad Schools of Science—or when the district opened Conrad, DMA, and Conrad Schools of Science—over 20 or 20 years ago, is that we did move about 400 students. We earn 400 more students over that period of time. However, for the past 15 years, we have remained static at the high school level. We educate about 5,000 students, a bit more than 5,000 students, of which 4,000 are Red Clay residents, are in-district students. I think that's important to note because I think that's important information to show that that's where we are and that's who we are. And the University of Delaware—you're going to see a slide by the University of Delaware shortly that will assist with that. If you look at our middle schools, very similar. We actually over the same time period—this goes back, the bar graph and line graph—the bar graph shows the current enrollment at all eight of our middle school programs, and the line graph shows all eight as they were in 2000. Brandywine Springs and the John Dickinson Middle Year program did not exist in 2000, so we've gone from six middle school programs to eight middle school programs, and we actually have less students in our middle schools now than we did 25 years ago. So we have a reduction of about a hundred students. A lot of discussion about the charter schools at the middle school level that have come up in New Castle County over that time period. I would say for the most part we've remained constant, but certainly have seen no increase, but we have increased seats significantly over that time. Give you a moment to consider that slide.

Next slide. As you see, we actually over the past 15 years have decreased in middle school enrollment while we've added new schools to our middle school programming. We next talked a lot about the impact of low enrollment on programming okay and and I I will be the as someone who has worked in high schools for for many many years okay it's difficult to tell whether programming you know there there's a clear connection between enrollment and programming and if you are underenrolled it is very very difficult to offer a comprehensive program to your schools to to your to your families at your school okay couple of examples are advanced coursework opportunities elective and CTE programming opportunities extracurricular opportunities and the one that gets probably the most press is high school athletics right you'll always hear that AI duPont had to cancel their football season or school B had to they didn't have a softball team the last couple of years all right so while it may not be the most important of the four people can easily identify with that because they hear that in the community. Next slide.

College Course Offerings so some actual data associated with that, you see Cab Calloway and Conrad the number of college courses that they offer when compared to AI High, McKean and Dickinson okay and I think it's important to note that you know if we have a comprehensive high school and we want students to attend our comprehensive high school we have to be comprehensive in nature and I think that that is something that the committee continued to grapple with over this time period and then the interscholastic athletic offerings you know show a lower number of offerings at AI, McKean and Dickinson when compared to Conrad, Charter School of Wilmington and DMA. Most significantly I think is the lack of subvarsity programming at those schools and so a ninth grader coming into the high school and wanting to try a sport may be somewhat less eager to participate if they have to jump in at a varsity level of competition. Next slide.

So after looking at significant data for a couple of meetings we sort of came up with key findings and we've already spoken through some of those. High school feeders were last updated in 2002 resulting in no straight line feeders between the middle schools and the high schools. There had been a precipitous enrollment decline at Skyline the year that the John Dickinson MYP opened in 2015 so precipitous decline of nearly 400 students over a 10-year period. AI High had a precipitous enrollment decline between 2010 and 2025 from 1400 students to 550 students, 575 where it currently stands. AI High, we looked at some data—I did not share this data again, it's on the website—but there are significant more. There are significantly more students who could possibly attend McKean or Dickinson than there are AI High School. Okay. I did not—that data was complex in nature and very difficult to understand but let me tell you that Dickinson and McKean currently have about 80% more students to potentially attend their attendance zone school than does AI duPont High School okay so that was a key finding we came up with.

We discussed the fact that Warner has no distinct feeder pattern, Warner Elementary School. It is one of two schools that splits up its fifth grade class and sends them to two different middle schools and then from there those two different middle schools the Warner community goes to all three of our high schools. High school enrollment has remained constant but we have gone from five to seven high schools over the past 20 years. Middle school enrollment has declined slightly but we have gone from six to eight middle schools in the past 20 years. A prioritization of Red Clay residents in magnet and charter schools, that's Charter School of Wilmington, Delaware Military Academy, Conrad and Cab Calloway. In the choice process the School Board insisted that those students that Red Clay residents be given preference has impacted the attendance zone high school enrollment negatively over this time or there's been a reduction that can be attributed to it. And there are fragmented middle school and high school attendance zones in the city of Wilmington that have existed since 1982.

University of Delaware's Center for Applied Demography and Survey Research provided -just probably three months ago- an analysis of public school enrollment over the next 30 years from 2021 through 2050. They just produced the survey; you see Red Clay in purple at about 14,500 students in the year 2050 they anticipate and predict 12,000 students. They expect the growth and movement to lower New Castle County and Sussex County over that time period. Again we have that study on our site. At this time I'd like to introduce Dr. Green to join us and talk a little bit about the Redding Consortium.

⏯️ 26:27 Dorrell Green: Good evening everyone. Thank you for those who are here in the auditorium at Brandywine Springs and those who are joining us online. As Mr. Pruitt indicated these are longstanding enrollment trends that impact Red Clay because at the end of the day Red Clay is truly a microcosm not only of northern New Castle County but the state and so when we look at our charter charter options when we look at choice—I happened to be at Linden Hill’s fifth grade move up ceremony today and it was interesting number that the fifth grade class that's moving up to sixth grade are likely to attend 14 different middle schools and so that's a lot of pull on community, that's a lot of pull on neighborhoods. That's again - families have options and choice but when you look at a comprehensive school district that pulls on our ability to have that enrollment.

And so what you actually see on the slide today is the Redding Consortium for education equity is also under a process as a result of which was initially Senate Bill 148 but was House Bill 22, 222 and 229 which was to promote educational equity within the City of Wilmington and Northern New Castle County. The goal was to streamline from four to two comprehensive or traditional districts that serve the city of Wilmington. So currently the Brandywine School District, Christina School District, Colonial, Red Clay along with New Castle County Vo-tech but the four main school districts are the ones that the city of Wilmington as a part of the city has been carved out to serve the City of Wilmington. And so the Redding Consortium's task is to look at redistricting with the primary goal to which was approved in an interim plan on May 9th of 2024 which was to remove the Christina School District from serving the city of Wilmington. That plan or that goal is to then redistribute that part of the city to yet to be defined comprehensive school districts to serve again two or fewer which would mean two out of the four would no longer be serving the city of Wilmington in addition to Christina no longer serving the city of Wilmington and the final plan expected by March 2026.

They have three—we have, as I serve on the Redding Consortium, fiscal, operational and engagement subcommittees. There is a meeting this weekend, June 14th at East Side Charter School that is hosted by Redding Consortium. They had two town halls, one on May 19th which was an in-person hosted at Warner Elementary and then it was a virtual town hall on May 22nd and they're exploring different things around teacher pay, wraparound services, early learning is a big conversation in that space just in terms of what does early education early learning look like and then various options for whatever the remaining schools would be. American Institute of Research is conducting a landscape analysis and this analysis is really looking at the social drivers of health, really looking at the lived experience of the children's families and communities within the city of Wilmington that really impact our schools.

One of the interesting findings: there are approximately let's just say 3,000 or so current Wilmington residents that live in Wilmington proper high school age children attending grades 9 to 12. They go to 37 different high schools across the state. 37 different high schools. Proportionately AI High School serves as the largest number of students out of that number but yet it's the lowest enrolled Red Clay school. So I'll say that again, AI duPont High School proportionately serves the largest number of current 9th through 12th grade students that live within the city of Wilmington but it's the lowest or one of the lowest overall enrolled schools in the state. And so clearly through our analysis looking at the 20-year history of enrollment it's just not a Red Clay issue it's a broader northern New Castle County issue but it impacts us locally just in terms of how we're able to provide programming and sustainability of programming within our district.

And so they're considering looking at various options which will be discussed this weekend per some modeling conducted by American Institute of Research to look at what would be the impact if there were a single school district. I know many within the community have championed we need a Wilmington School District back but what would that look like? What would that impact look like? What would be the disproportionate impact on students' families and residents within the city of Wilmington but then more importantly the districts that currently serve the city of Wilmington? I can tell you preliminarily that students probably would fare far worse than they do now because that would further concentrate high levels of need within a small geographic area which would then require a lot more support. What does a northern New Castle County consolidated school district look like? Again a modeling that will take place and then pairing multiple districts a Colonial-Red Clay, Colonial-Brandywine, Brandywine-Red Clay all of the options excluding Christina from the city of Wilmington.

Upcoming timelines again analysis and engagement will continue through the summer through the fall. The controller general's office would review the fiscal impact of things in January 2026. They would have to submit a final plan to the State Board of Education for review and then legislative approval a year from now. So that work does potentially impact but I think the thing that we've already taken a step to really look at what the analysis looks like for us within Red Clay as a district. I think we've done our due diligence to see what that impact looks like to us locally irregardless of what happens with the Redding Consortium, we'd be clear-eyed in terms of what that impact would look like for us from facilities enrollment and then more importantly from a programmatic standpoint.

So happy to answer any questions once we get to the Q&A section of it but I will say this: the other point that Mr. Pruitt brought up no rhyme or reason around the 2000 early 2000 high school feeder pattern change that likely had to do with the Neighborhood Schools Act as well. That was the same time period where districts more importantly K-8 were forced to have students come. That was the end of Deseg busing; students then attended schools those who lived in the city of Wilmington close to home which obviously had a disproportionate impact because there were no high schools within the city of Wilmington. So when you look at high school feeder patterns again as a district our feeder patterns - no rhyme or reason - are carved up into various parts of communities within the city of Wilmington. So thank you.  

Mark Pruitt: So the committee Dr. Bond will come up to talk about the committee's brainstorming and again we'll be here to answer any questions once we get to the conclusion of the presentation.

⏯️ 33:52 Tawanda Bond: Thank you Dr. Green. So I'm here just to share some information about how we brainstormed in our committee. One of my roles is making sure that we have equitable, rich, representative voices heard in all of our committee meetings. So in our meeting when we got to our brainstorming session we really talked about no idea was too big or too small because we wanted to make sure everyone was recognized in the space but we made sure that we always had our goals—our goals to keep us on track and on pace with the goals that were charged to us by our Board. Strong and balanced enrollment across schools; aligning our balance to K-8 attendance zones when possible; considering geographic and neighborhood schools when possible; and equitable access to quality education for all students. And these were kind of our norms at the bottom.

All right so during that conversation we had a lot of rich conversations in our groups. Our groups were diverse and where we landed was on about 12 recommendations. So this was kind of our big ideas. So we were very innovative in our thought processes. We had a lot of conversations in our groups but we really always brought it back to the relevance of our ideas: so do those ideas really address the core issues of enrollment and programming? So what you'll see here is kind of where we started and when I'm done I'm going to turn it over to one of my colleagues Mr. Sean Snyder to talk us through some of the research that went into where we're ending at currently.

The first one was to repurpose one high school as a technical high school innovation center so that really would reduce us down to two attendance zone schools making an innovation center that would be available to our Red Clay to our middle school students; moving MYP to Skyline; creating a virtual program opportunity for secondary students.

And then moving CSW to one of our existing high schools and reducing down to two attendance zone high schools; also expanding Dickinson to a 6-12 IB magnet program, which would also reduce us down to two attendance zone schools; reducing down from eight to seven middle school programs because we started looking at how some of these things could be in tandem; move AI Middle to AI High; we talked about creating a 6 through 12 school A through Z program; capping Cab and Conrad so that they would have smaller enrollments; creating a K-8 attendance zone school at Warner; we had conversations around this; creating a K-12 attendance zone school at Warner; and then choice busing for all students to all schools. So as you can see, this was a large amount of differing opinions on ways that we can address the goal that was charged to us by the Board, but in order for us to progress beyond this point, we needed more information. We needed research, we needed more data, we needed more expert opinions and expert advice. So I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Sean Snyder to walk us through what our next steps were.

⏯️ 37:12 Shawn Snyder: Good evening everyone. So to get this expert advice, we tapped on a couple of people that work here in the Red Clay School District. We have Dr. Ted Ammon and Dr. Cory Heacock, our Chief Operating Officer and our Manager of Teaching and Learning and Assessment. They did an analysis of our facilities and looked at several categories, one being the HR impact—that's human resources, that's our human capital, the people that work in a building; our transportation, how we get students there; our technology and nutrition, the ability to have things like this and make sure our students eat each day; our facilities, just the state that they're in and what type of improvements would be necessary if we were to move buildings; and then finally the overall cost to the district, not just initial costs but long-term costs.

Dr. Ammon did an analysis and decided to rate these between high, low, and medium, and this is not necessarily a scientific study but it's a brief overview of what some of the high-level resources we would need to make these moves. We looked at every single idea and right here high and low and medium don't necessarily mean good or bad; they just mean the amount of effort, the amount of time, or the amount of treasure that would have to be dedicated to making that move. And I'll give you a moment just to digest these ones right here. For example, the innovation center, the HR impact would be high because you would move the teachers from one building and distribute them into two other buildings. The transportation would be higher because we would now have an additional run to get those students to an innovation center, but you would also be losing a bus run because there would be two high schools instead of three. The tech nutrition: it's pretty much the same; we would redistribute those efforts, but it wouldn't be a big lift for the technology department and it wouldn't be a huge lift for our nutrition department. Facilities: there would be a level of upgrading that the buildings would need to be able to have these programs in them, so there would be an impact. And then finally the cost; generally right down the middle too—there would be some investment that would be required, but it's not like building a new building, which would be a high cost.

Let's go to the next slide. Once again, these are all the choices the committee came up with, evaluating each one. I'll give you a moment to look through these while you do. I'll go through consolidated 6 to 8 programs: once again, HR impact was medium; transportation was a medium impact; tech nutrition low; facilities would be a high impact there because we would be moving a lot of buildings around and that takes a considerable amount of money and effort; and then the cost would be medium for all of those types of moves.

Let's go to the next slide as well. Same thing right here; we have our other choices, whether it be Warner Shortage K to 8, Warner K-12, capping Cab and Conrad—we mean limiting the amount of students that can enter there—or choice busing. Now I do want to point out one of the ones right there for cost for choice busing because this was one that we talked about quite a bit in the committee and it seems on its surface an easy solution. Transportation to do this way—to make sure a bus basically shows up at everybody's house and brings them to school no matter where you go—is almost prohibitively expensive given the rules of how Delaware funds transportation. The difference would be completely on the local and it would be a staggering amount of money to make that happen.

So we also had Dr. Heacock conduct a lot of research to answer some of the questions the committee came with. After each one of the meetings we might look at some feeder patterns and I think it was Miss Nesmith or Dr. Nesmith—I'm sorry—asked, "Well what's the preferable grade pattern for a school? Should it be K-8? Should it be middle school? Should it be K-12?" So Dr. Heacock evaluated research, actually did some evaluations of districts neighboring us, and we determined in that one there is really no definitive research about a magical grade pattern that really addresses some of the needs. Most of the time what we discovered is grade patterns aren't even considered when making these decisions; things like cost, transportation, population density—those make those decisions before anybody even gets to that part. So we couldn't find anything compelling; there doesn't seem to impact outcomes, at least in the research that is available.

What we did find is the size of a school does impact performance, and we found this in Delaware and then actually throughout the country in both research and then an analysis of neighboring school districts. There's a little bit of magic in a school that maxes out at around 1,500 students; there seems to be a sweet spot according to the literature. The other thing too is the larger a school, the less expensive that school is to run to a certain point, which makes sense with economies of scale. When you do things in bulk—go to Costco, buy toilet paper; go to the gas station, buy toilet paper—figure out which one's cheaper. That makes a lot of sense. Research on grade level configurations is inconclusive. I said before, grade level configuration is typically based on student enrollment, building space, cost, and community influence.

Let's go to the next slide. All of our homework, and Dr. Heacock really did this work—I don't want to take credit for it, she did a phenomenal job gathering this information—and all these links are live links that you can go check out our sources if you need to after the presentation. At this time, I believe I'm handing this over to—is this Jodi? I think this is your slide.

⏯️ 42:43 Jodi Muffley: An analysis of ideas: each idea considered against the relevance to the problem. Does this idea address the core issues of enrollment and programming? Feasibility: what is the practicality of implementing the idea considering resources and possible constraints? And the impact: is this a high leverage initiative?

⏯️ 43:22 Unknown Speaker: So after a lot of great conversation and some robust discussions, the committee agreed to move forward with the following parts of its recommendation. So number one is alignment of attendance zones to create straight line feeder patterns that align high school attendance zones with the existing middle school attendance zones, very similar to what Red Clay did in 2015 from elementary and middle school. Balanced enrollment, which distributes students equitably across attendance zone high schools. And then program equity: ensure all students, regardless of high school, have access to high quality academic and extracurricular programs, which definitely goes back to one of Mr. Pruitt's earlier slides, giving kids opportunities: AP classes, dual enrollment, athletically. Okay, so the committee unanimously agreed to remove the following ideas from further consideration without further discussion. One was creating a K through 12 attendance zone school at Warner Elementary; the indoor and outdoor facility is not equipped for high school. Obviously Warner is absolutely gorgeous from the outside, but there's not room for a football field. And then next one was to make this innovation center available to middle school students. We had a really nice discussion on that and the topic was really, while middle school students could take a field trip to the innovation center, it is not necessarily developmentally appropriate to transport middle school students to another site for programming on a regular basis because middle school students and the bus are not always the best combination.

And then this was our committee; we each had to do four different tallies that we felt were the best going forward, and this is how the committee voted.

Mark Pruitt: Go back one slide. Once we went through the analysis of ideas, we pulled a couple out because practically they didn't make sense. We then took a straw poll of the committee members where they could choose four of the ideas and it sort of gave us some ideas as to where we should consider to have discussions when developing a recommendation. All right, the ones are the four. So if you look at Jason Bastinelli at the top: Relocate CSW, K-8 at Warner, 8 to 7 middle school programs, and John Dickinson MYP to Skyline were the four he supported the most at that moment with the information he knew. You could not choose five; you could choose three.

⏯️ 46:08 Mark Pruitt: Okay, the committee then began to ask questions about the Innovation Center. Obviously, it was the most outside-the-box idea, and so in 2022 our district conducted an audit of our CTE programming in the school district. We looked at several things: the curriculum, the industry partner committees that we needed to have, but we also looked at the facilities themselves. And when doing so, we came up with—I have three areas on a rubric: one, they meet the standard of our new strategic plan; yellow, they're approaching the standards of our new strategic plan; and red, they do not. The facility itself and the classroom and the contents inside the classroom does not meet currently; it allowed us to do something to work over the next five years. What you see is that McKean, not only the district but McKean itself, has really leaned into career and technical education programming over the past 15 years. I think they are the flagship of career and technical education not only in Red Clay but in the state of Delaware. So what does it give us? It gives us teachers over there that have a great program not only, but facilities that give us a great program.

Next slide. The committee wanted to look at, "Well, who else does this?" and so we spent some time at a meeting looking at Cherry Creek Innovation Campus in Centennial, Colorado, and more locally, the Cecil County School of Technology in Cecil County, Maryland. Actually had an opportunity to speak with their superintendent of schools as well as an assistant principal at the program and bring some information about how that program works back to the committee. Then there were some questions about, "Well, what would it look like in Red Clay? What might it look like?" And this was really a stretch. And so a school counselor at AI High who's on the committee, Maddie Wright-Meier, she and I met and really just sort of sketched out some ideas. Right, certainly two people don't make the decision of what an innovation center and its relationship to its two home high schools—you don't make that decision with a school counselor and an administrator—but we did have significant experience in our roles at the high school level and took a look at what that might look like.

We also spoke to Rodel—we've done some work with Rodel and with Hanover Research on where jobs are going to be over the next 10 years. And so we took everything, and if we put it at McKean, that would be facilities that already meet the standard of our new strategic plan. We would have to upgrade the Academy of Finance, move that over from AI to McKean—pretty easy lift. The more of a little heavier of a lift, the Entrepreneurship program from Dickinson to McKean, but McKean had really invested in everything and there was a lot of—there were a lot of things that the two schools do that McKean already does.

Where we had gaps are in two areas. One is health science: while we do have a patient care program at McKean, we would need to expand that patient care. We know there are wages for 18-year-olds to go whether that be a radiology tech, a phlebotomy tech, a CNA, to be job-ready with a livable wage at 18 with also the opportunity to take college credits and build on that career. Additionally, the area where we have a real gap where there are jobs out there now is in information technology. The area of computer tech—we've all had our—been in a workspace or at home where our computer does not work and we have to call the tech that works for that company and they come out and they fix the problem. A very valuable part of our school district; Sean works with those folks all the time. There is a Cisco three-year program that could provide a certification, so that would be an area we would need to add to give all of our high school students access to that program, as well as some a cybersecurity pathway to get students involved in. So we do know there's some gaps there.

Next slide. You know, what might it look like for a 9th through 12th grader? A 9th grader might take a CTE exploratory course at the home school with field trips to the innovation center during their 9th grade year. In 10th grade, it's a three-year—a three-credit sequence of courses that is a graduation requirement in the state of Delaware. They would take a 1.5 credit class in 10th grade, a 1.5 credit class in 11th grade to complete that three-credit sequential pathway, and then the senior year be able to take dual enrollment college coursework associated with that pathway or industry standard credentialing coursework associated with that pathway. Just an idea to sort of let people get their hands around it.

⏯️51:34 Mark Pruitt: Next slide. What might it look like at our schools? All three of our schools operate on an AB block; that is an 8-period day with four periods on a Monday, 5, 6, 7 and 8 on a Tuesday, and then it starts again—1, 2, 3, 4 on a Wednesday, 5, 6, 7, 8 on a Thursday. What might it look like at the innovation center? Students arrive on campus. Obviously, as students got older, if they had transportation to get to the Innovation campus to start their day, they could drive directly; you'd have to have a setup like that. But if they rode a school bus, they would arrive at their home school, get on a shuttle bus—either 9 or 13 minutes—head over to the innovation center for an Innovation Center block from 7:55 to 10:05, board a shuttle bus that departs for the home campus at 10:15, and be ready to attend block 3 and/or lunch at the home campus at 10:30. Very similar to what is done at the Cecil program and the Cherry Creek program. And you can see what a PM block might look like as well. So a quarter of your day—an AM or a PM on an A or a B day—would be spent in this program. Certainly you could potentially take an elective that would have you over there all day and what that might look like—there's a lot of work to be done but they asked for you know sort of a sample of what might it look like for Red Clay. Next slide.

Then we got into decision-making okay and the first one we pulled out was virtual 6-12 programming. There were 9 out of 19 tallies for it; there certainly was interest for it. We decided that it was worth further investigation and that we would include it in our recommendation, but we would include it in a way that allowed the district to further investigate the possibility of virtual programming going forward. We did initially—the committee had it as a 6 through 12 virtual programming opportunities. The committee by and large thought it was developmentally inappropriate to have middle school on online courses and so our recommendation will be for further consideration of 9 through 12 courseware.

Reduced enrollment at Conrad School of Science and Cab Calloway: no one gave a tally and so went with unanimous consent we removed it from further consideration. AI Middle School and AI High School: combining the two for a 6-12 attendance zone campus did receive two tallies out of 19. The idea would limit future enrollment at AI High and had unanimous consent to remove from further consideration. Relocate the Charter School of Wilmington from the Wilmington campus to one of the three existing high schools and reduce down to two attendance zone high schools: got four tallies out of 19. At this point there had been enough discussion that there could potentially be a nay vote so we did take a vote. I made a motion to remove the idea due to not enough support by the committee. Discussion ensued, there was a second, and the motion passed to remove it from further consideration 11-0, and two abstained. There were no "no" votes. Choice busing for all students received five tallies of 19. After significant discussion—and I think I got this worded pretty well—while all members agreed with the idea conceptually, the idea was not practical and the district did not have the funding for such an initiative. There was a motion, a second, and the motion passed to remove it from further consideration 11 yes to 2 no.

Now we were down to a core group that were somewhat connected to one another. So you could not make a decision to move forward with an Innovation center at McKean and reduce down to two high schools and leaning into the John Dickinson school as an all-magnet school and reducing down to two high schools—if we're going to move forward you can only move forward with one. Significant discussion about that okay. Miss Todd Dixon, who was on the committee, made a motion to move forward with the idea in the recommendation to move forward with the Thomas McKean Innovation Campus and remove the John Dickinson IB Magnet from further consideration. The motion was seconded by Dr. Muffley, here with us tonight. The motion passed 11 yes, two abstentions. With the innovation center decision, the idea of the John Dickinson school was removed from further consideration. I apologize for the missing "i" and an "n." Go down one.

Okay, consolidation of middle school: these two were connected right? Reducing down middle schools from 8 to 7 was a broad idea and then there were a couple that were more specific in nature. After significant discussion I made a motion just to move us towards a vote to move forward with both ideas in the recommendation: one, the consolidation of middle school programs from 8 to 7, and moving the John Dickinson Middle Years Programme to Skyline. The first one had 13 tallies, the second one nine tallies. The idea of the committee was that this would allow for increased high school enrollment at the John Dickinson school, and the motion was seconded by Mr. Leonard. 12 members in attendance voted unanimously.

The discussion about where to move the Dickinson—what to do with the middle schools—there were two issues: one is moving the Dickinson MYP middle school program and the K-8 at Warner. There was significant discussion and concern about the Warner community and the fact that those students have significant travel to the two schools the furthest away in our school district, HB duPont Middle School and Skyline Middle School. However, the committee did think the idea of adding an additional middle school program contradicted the committee's charge. So we're working to boost enrollment, to improve and expand programming, and now we found ourselves talking about adding a middle school attendance zone at Warner Elementary. What we did was, because of the concern around the city of Wilmington middle school attendance zones, by unanimous consent the committee agreed to include a future re-evaluation of middle school attendance zones, particularly as they relate to the Warner Elementary School community. We decided to include that in the final recommendation.

The recommendation, as I'm sure most or all of you have seen at this point—there was a one-pager that went out—we came up with three core principles: create straight line feeder patterns that align high school attendance zones with existing middle school attendance zones; balanced enrollment, distribute students equitably across attendance zone high schools; and program equity, ensure that all students, regardless of high school, have access to high-quality academic and extracurricular programming.

Specifically, program change number one is the establishment of Thomas McKean Innovation Campus. The committee recommends that Thomas McKean High School be reimagined as a Thomas McKean Innovation Campus through expanded partnerships with local colleges, universities, and the business community. The flagship hub will provide coursework in the following areas: CTE programming, industry standard credentialing programming, and early college credit opportunities. As part of the change, the number of comprehensive high school attendance zone schools would be reduced from 3 to 2: AI High and the John Dickinson School. These two comprehensive high schools would split the Red Clay High School attendance zones equally, allowing for increased enrollment and more robust academic and extracurricular offerings at those two schools. These two attendance zones better align with the middle school attendance zones allowing for straight line feeder patterns from middle school to high school, and that the program would provide a short shuttle bus transportation to AI High and Dickinson to the McKean Innovation Campus for career technical and early college coursework.

Program change number two was the relocation of the John Dickinson Middle Years Programme to allow for increased high school enrollment at the John Dickinson School. The committee recommends relocating MYP middle school program from Dickinson to Skyline Middle School, allowing for more balanced enrollment across middle school programming.

Finally, two additional recommendations for future consideration by the district: one deals with middle school attendance zones—re-evaluate middle school attendance zones especially as they pertain to the Warner Elementary School community to improve feeder pattern continuity and equity; and two, virtual high school programming—explore the development of virtual high school coursework to expand flexibility and learning opportunities for Red Clay students.

Next slide. Stakeholder engagement: once we came up with a draft—it really was a lot of work to get to that—we came up with a draft and we're out now trying to engage with stakeholders. We did some of that; we had 7 public meetings scheduled. We already had 6 of them; we actually had 6 originally and we added one because we knew we had too much work to get done. And there was public comment I believe all except for one of those meetings. June 10th here tonight we're having a community meeting with a question and answer session. We just completed two student focus groups, one for middle school students and one for high school students. An executive summary of those two focus groups will be provided to the committee next Tuesday at our meeting. And we have a community survey that's currently open. There's a QR code to get to the survey if you have not already taken it. However, we wanted to not only be able to dialogue with the folks who came out to the meeting here tonight and answer questions, but again allow you to hold off on completing the survey before answering the questions. Okay, question answer. Go back to the queue; we'll leave a QR code up.

Dorrell Green: I want to personally thank Mr. Pruitt and the committee members who spent the past 6 months. Again, these aren't easy conversations for us to have, and the reality of it is to kind of do status quo and do nothing will further exacerbate a lot of the inequities that we see within our district. And so one of the agreements was again no idea would get critiqued or receive criticism, but when we know we're talking about students, when we're talking about families, when we're talking about feeder patterns, it ultimately impacts people. It's going on 7 years that I've been in this school district and programs come, programs go. We have certain programs and schools that are desirable within our district at the expense of others. We are the Red Clay Consolidated School District, and what consolidation means is that every child, every family, every educator should at least have some foundational semblance of the same experience regardless of what school you're in under the Red Clay umbrella.

So this was a committee's attempt to take historical dynamics that fall outside of our community—choice, charter, 20-year feeder pattern enrollments, declining enrollments—to compile all of that information to put forth recommendations per the Board's charge to investigate what it would look like to provide an equitable outcome or experience for every student within our district. So there are no definitive answers, but I do want to thank the committee members for bringing their ideas, for bringing their concepts, for digging into the data, for doing the research, and for giving of their time with students in mind to look at what we can do as a school district community to not only be innovative in a sense, creative in a sense, but more importantly to be equitable about what that learning experience is for every child, every student across the district. We just had 5 commencement ceremonies; many of them look different than the others, but in the end over $10 million worth of scholarship awards granted to our graduates across the district. They're going to top schools, but it is our responsibility and due diligence to make sure that every student has that opportunity, and the way that status quo is, we're not granting every student, every family, every child that opportunity across the district. So whether it's this recommendation or another one, we do have to evolve and have to change to make sure that we look at again—because numbers aren't growing but we've increased the number of seats and capacity, so there has to be something.

So we want your collective input, we want your feedback, and now will transition to the question and answer session because I know there are questions both online and in the audience. So I'll bring Mr. Pruitt back up so that we can really figure out how we're going to answer those questions. So we can start with in-person first. One moment.

⏯️ 1:06:34 Audience Member Orr: Hi, so hi how are you? First off, thank you everyone on the committee for all your hard work. I guess 2 areas of concern are the bus transportation for students with disabilities and then the bus transportation for students with behaviors when you're talking about an innovation center. So for example if a kid gets a bus suspension and then let's say that kid also has a student with a disability, where's the fine line between denying that kid access to FAPE? So it's just something to consider. Number 2: magnet schools. I mean I kind of feel like we're ignoring the elephant in the room. The whole purpose of a magnet is to attract, yet we're talking about a comprehensive school district with a comprehensive school but the idea of relooking or looking at these magnet schools wasn't considered. And I just am shocked but at the same time not surprised that that was missing because those tend to be the holy grails of the Red Clay School District. And I mean Mr. Pruitt, no offense, but you were the principal of one of those schools. So I mean it's tough for me to think that the committee really exhausted all consideration when no tallies were given to even reconsider looking at the magnet schools. What would that look like if the magnet schools were absorbed into the 3 comprehensive schools where students still have access to all the great programs that all the other comprehensive schools offer and they're still getting great instruction by talented individuals? That's I mean I guess that's my question is why wasn't that considered?

Dorrell Green: So I'll let Mr. Pruitt bring the profile up, but there was discussion around capping the enrollment of the 2 magnet schools. And for the sake of the public and the community, the state of Delaware does not have a magnet school designation; that is actually just a Red Clay designation. Be it as it may, we're talking about Conrad and Cab Calloway, so let's be specific about what we're talking about. In essence, they do go through choice process and have a semblance of an enrollment cap per se. The question was do you further cap their enrollment, and per the committee's discussions from my understanding they decided that really looking at that wasn't an option but there was discussion around just that.

Audience Member (Orr): I guess my question is why have them at all when you have a comprehensive district with 3 comprehensive high schools that could service all kids in an equitable fashion?

Dorrell Green: So what 2 schools then do we then close?

Audience Member (Orr): Cab and Conrad.

Dorrell Green: We have 5 high schools. You say go to 3 comprehensive high schools.  

Audience Member (Orr): I am not trying to be a rabble rouser (lost mic) ...No. And I guess the question is that if we have 5 schools. We have 2 magnet schools and we have 3 comprehensive high schools. Why don't we look at adjusting or closing the 2 magnet schools so those kids could matriculate into the comprehensive schools? 

Mark Pruitt: I can speak to it only through the lens of the committee as best I can. One, that didn't come up as an idea after brainstorming in 3 small groups. Nothing was a bad idea, think outside the box. There was discussion or an idea to cap those programs, make them make those programs smaller. I think in the limited discussion that there was a thought that they were the most popular in terms of choice applications and that potentially that was a metric used in the decision-making process. That's just—but again I might be speaking for someone on the committee so I'm going to let Dr. Kecia Nesmith speak to that.

⏯️ 1:11:38 Kecia Nesmith: I think it's—Thank you for that question. Thank you for that question. There was some discussion around that. I particularly brought that up. I think part of the issue was that we didn't want to get too deep into philosophical differences around magnets and the purpose of magnets. Magnets, I'll put in air quotes, and the purpose of magnets. Because in the state of Delaware with school choice we often have a fractured approach to schooling because of the choice. And so the magnet schools were created, the programs were created, and these are things that I think that we need to continue to explore but without creating too much of a fractured school district in the time period that the School Board and the Board—is the collective, not the person—had charged this group with. I think that that would be too—I can't think of the word—but, it would impact a lot.

But I do think that we need to look at not just the school district but the state because a lot of the issues that we are talking about come from the different laws and the different mandates of the state. And so what would schools look like in Delaware in general if there wasn't school choice? I know many of us may be from other states. I'm from Pennsylvania originally; we didn't have school choice. We have smaller districts, they're funded differently, and so to have a comprehensive high school in those locations made a lot more sense. But with our district being one of the bigger districts and trying to mitigate too much change at once, I think that this is what we settled on. But I would say that there were many people who did have the perspective, myself included, around looking at the magnet program schools or whatever. So I do think that that was a good point to bring up, but in terms of what we actually are able to do with funding and change and all of that I think that this is—my personal opinion—that we don't have a perfect idea for how to move forward but I think it is addressing the charge of the committee which was to ensure that there's equitable programming and access.

One of the things I did bring up though, and I think we can continue to talk about this, is the early college offerings and the things that are happening at Conrad and Cab Calloway. How do they have access to the innovation center and if they have access to the innovation center? So I think there's some curricular things and some programmatic pieces at all levels of the school that could be addressed through a plan that would move forward so that it would be a little bit more equitable around around the around the whole thing and then eventually maybe looking at those magnet schools and looking at a different approach.

Mark Pruitt: All right, what I'm going to do is I'm gonna take a second question here. Mr. Hynson.

⏯️ 1:15:18 Audience Member Devon Hynson: All right so number 1: I have some of the same concerns that the gentleman just expressed, but with some of the transportation issues that I've experienced over the last 20 years as a student advocate I just don't have any confidence. I think it's unreasonable to expect that we're going to handle transportation effectively because we came up with a new innovation program. So I just think that that's wrongheaded just to begin with; that's just my personal opinion. The other thing is that I didn't recognize any community members on the list that you had so I would like to go and look at how many people from the community were actually on that committee to begin with. And then the third one is because I was under the impression that much of this was generated because of the concerns with AI and the enrollment right? So I wanted to know what prompted the committee and why basically was the committee created? So that's 3 questions. Can somebody write them down?

Mark Pruitt: Yeah I'll answer. Well the first one was more of a comment I think, but I'll answer the second question which was the 7 nominating districts. There were 7 members on the committee, one from each of the 7 nominating districts. We allowed folks to put their name in if they were interested; it created about—I think there were about 120 people that were interested. The largest nominating district had 20 or 25; the small—but everyone had at least one. So all 7 nominating districts in the Red Clay School District were represented on the committee. We confirm their address within each of the nominating—a few of them are here.

And what was the third question I think is more of a Board level question and maybe Dr. Green. It was like what prompted the Board to ask to launch this committee?

Dorrell Green: So 2 things I think prompted. One, discussion around overall high school enrollment which AI—the Friends of AI, the task force, which we did have a task force to look at AI. But generally speaking, we went through a strategic plan process and we knew that certain schools were offering certain programs that other schools weren't. So when the Board gave us the charge to look at AI, we told them we're at this position because previous times when one school in Red Clay had an issue, decisions were made that impacted pretty much everybody. So if we're not looking at this from a comprehensive lens and we're only looking at it through the vacuum or lens—because when Dickinson's enrollment was similar to being the lowest enrolled high school when AI was at its peak in 2009 and and choice busing was providing transportation from suburban McKean and suburban Dickinson feeder patterns to prop up AI's enrollment, we didn't have a task force or committee at that point. That just became the flagship high school.

So rather than do something in isolation to address one school, we looked at something comprehensively with the charge of the Board to look at what this means for the totality of the district and how do we look at programming, resources, opportunity, and access across all of Red Clay. And so the com—(Question from audience) I didn't see a hand up just to answer—and I'll hand I'll hand it over quickly so realistically resources to have that same level—Who's next? I can walk to you—to have that same level of programming we wouldn't be able to have the the arts programs at each school at the same level. We wouldn't be able to have the sciences programs because of the resources. So you do limit by having more and you want to give everything.

⏯️ 1:19:47Audience Member Anne Budischak: Thank you. Hello district administrators, my name's Anne Budischak. I show up sometimes as a parent but I am showing up tonight to represent our small but beautiful slice of the district which is the MYP program at the John Dickinson School. So I do have a few questions; my colleagues who are joining us virtually have submitted questions as well but we're just looking for some clarification basically because there's been a lot of conversation about the impact on the high school communities and a lot of details around that but very little information about the MYP kind of shows up as a bullet point once in a while. So first, do you anticipate the MYP becoming a small program within Skyline or do you anticipate transitioning Skyline in its entirety to a middle year's program?

Dorrell Green: Yep so I would generally say my vision would be you would have to go schoolwide to provide access. Because even within the MYP framework, just like we know with all even if—for example in the diploma program even if you don't get the diploma—the IB diploma, opportunity and access to that IB curriculum is something that elevates all students. And we do know that and from my previous experience in working with international baccalaureate program—

Anne Budischak: The certification is specific to school and site location.

Dorrell Green: That was my second question. That would be something that we would have to consider. Obviously when you look at IB certification that the school itself would have to be designated as such.

Anne Budischak: Yeah absolutely so IB no longer allows small programs within a larger school so you would have to provide that extensive training to all of Skyline staff. That is a huge lift and it's also an expensive one that I'm wondering if it was taken into consideration when you were looking at the cost of making that change. One more question: what's going to happen to us? Because I don't foresee this being a simple cut and paste situation. I unfortunately would anticipate losing some families in the transition from our building, our tiny little tea up in the corner of Dickinson, into a different building. A lot of what attracts our families to our program is the small nature of the program, so I don't anticipate all of our families moving over and you know there will be redundancy obviously with the staff. So how do you anticipate reassigning the MYP staff when this change happens?

Dorrell Green: And again I think when you look at the one chart around high impact, low impact, medium impact—obviously the devil's in the details. We know that there will be an impact to staffing, who's currently certified, who would want to transition, to your point, how will we onboard and train new teachers or new staff. Again having in a past life gone through that, every teacher would have to be trained in that building but that's something that we will and are considering just in terms of what that transition would look like. Again the devil is in the details, but that hasn't been completely ironed out yet.

Anne Budischak: Okay so just to clarify we don't yet know how the staff would be reassigned?

Dorrell Green: Correct.

Mark Pruitt: Yep I would say that when we've done this in the past, which was not me, that we do have to engage with the teachers particularly RCEA, come up with some actions as to how we would, you know, as to how we would make those decisions. And RCEA would absolutely have a role in that as to, you know, would a student- would a teacher—would you would advocate that first right to move over to that building and continue with that program. I don't anticipate but that's a lot of the work that needs to be done which is why there's a two-year buffer, you know a two-year gap to do work like this. Right, we would have to engage with RCEA not only for the—again that's a small program—but McKean High School's core content teachers going one direction, CTE teachers at AI and John Dickinson going the other direction. There's some significant work to be done.

Anne Budischak: So the timeline here would not be for obviously not next school year but not the school year after that either so three years?

Mark Pruitt: The earliest we could do something like that, that we could start the new programming would be August of 2027.

Anne Budischak: Thank you. I appreciate all of your time.

Mark Pruitt: And I know there may have been one other question just in terms of the impact of Redding and that's why we also pushed that timeline out because again Redding which is June of 2026 which is next year their decision to really see what does that impact actually mean for us to be aligned.

Let's transition and get Zoom —I do feel like when you offer a Zoom option that they are equal participants so Beth can you ask a question from Zoom or is that possible? Are you able to start up at the top for questions? Are you able to start up at the top? You read us some questions and I'll reread them; I have no problem for the record. Okay. He's going to repeat it. I'll restate it okay.

So I don't believe I think we answered question number 3 but not 1 or 2. Stakeholder feedback is currently being collected both at a meeting like this, through student focus groups, but most importantly through the survey which is open through Thursday. The second part of that question was that I believe this is a long-term solution for Red Clay and not a band-aid. How about we'll go to an in-person question now.

⏯️1:26:47 Audience Member Jenny Howard: Okay, Hi. All right. So first I just wanted to clarify for everyone the Delaware Choice Law just says that anybody can apply to any school in the state including traditional schools, charter schools, etc. if there's capacity available. So we really can't keep blaming this fragmented district on the state choice law. They don't have magnet schools in Brandywine and they don't have this problem there. The data clearly shows that the course offerings, the extracurriculars, and the advanced academic opportunities vary dramatically across our district. So these disparities are not driven by student ability or interest but by the structures we've created. So my question is: how does this proposed plan address the deeply rooted resource imbalances between Red Clay's traditional high schools and its magnet schools and how is the district going to ensure that their under-resourced neighborhoods are equitably represented and supported across all specialized offerings? Basically I'm asking: we have a two-tiered system right now; we have winners and losers depending on what school you get into. Are we going to have that again? Is it going to be equal access to this Innovation campus or is it going to be application-based?

Dorrell Green: So it would be equal access to start from your last question working backwards and that's the whole purpose of it right? Because we know that there are inequities because they're tied to career technical ed pathways. So certifications and credentials—that would be the point of creating a hub with work-based learning opportunities so that if I am a student in a magnet or another high school I have access to that certification. Brandywine School District: 3 high schools, 3 middle schools, straight line feeders. So to compare Brandywine to Red Clay I think is an exercise in futility because we're going to try to really compare apples to oranges. Brandywine School District also has their DSG order in play. The Neighborhood Schools Act does not impact Brandywine the same way it impacts Red Clay. Brandywine School District has one elementary school that serves the city of Wilmington as a whole; Lombardi, Carcraft, Hanby all distribute their city population and then their middle schools, Springer and PS duPont, straight line feeder tally straight line feeder. And their middle schools to our point where we looked at rebalancing these directly into a traditional high school. So choice across their district with the exception of if you're choicing at Mount Pleasant High School for the IB program—there's more equitable programming because they can be consistent across 3 high schools rather than the 5 that we have and then the 2 charters that we authorize.

Mark Pruitt: We're going to pivot to a virtual question. There's a question about—we answered that one; I think that was probably a fellow teacher at Dickinson. Are there any other questions? Got it. All right, how about an in-person question right in the front.

Audience Member Unknown Speaker: Thanks. I just have a question so can you clarify is Redding the one that's looking at what to do with Wilmington?

Dorrell Green: Yes.

Audience Member Unknown Speaker: We've got this going on and then your group here going on. How do they coexist when they're the changes that in one could impact the other on how it exists?

Dorrell Green: So Redding is legislated, right, and it's a legislative body. I do sit on Redding Consortium as well as all the other superintendents and then various other appointed folks. Their timeline is actually ahead of ours, so the reality of it is whatever change that the legislature would make—let's just say Colonial and Brandywine are determined to be the 2 school districts—they're going to have to go through an internal process post-Redding decision. We've actually gone through an analysis pre-Redding decision so that whatever decision that potentially comes out of Redding at least we have a greater understanding of what that impact would be to our district, to one, advocate on behalf of Red Clay, to know what additional resources, what bandwidth, what grade configurations, feeder patterns, what all those adjustments look like. We're somewhat ahead of the game.

And again this is what we can currently control which is Red Clay. We can't determine, we can give input, but I will say the American Institute of Research (AIR's) modeling of what those potential options will look like will be telling because again it's just not a matter of redistributing the feeder pattern. It's just not saying Red Clay: Take a portion of the children in the city of Wilmington and the children are going to fare better—we know that's not the case. We're also looking at resources; you're looking at concentration. What does that look like for students with disabilities? Are you creating inherently disproportionality, which likely would be the case because you're creating high pockets of students with need, students with varying needs into one school? So at least by us looking at this internal analysis I think we're ahead of the game and we're a year staggered behind any Redding decision.

⏯️1:33:24 Audience Member Devon Hynson: So if AI—let me sit down because I got to think—if AI was initially the reason why the public came and said we want to address the decrease in enrollment in that school and we pivoted to a larger more comprehensive solution, did we ever like address the issue of why AI was losing enrollment to begin with?

Dorrell Green: Yes we did.

Devon Hynson: What was that? What was the answer to that?

Dorrell Green: Feeder pattern. Families in AI are not attending AI and AI has a smaller percentage of their feeder students attending. So to Mr. Pruitt's earlier point...

Mark Pruitt: There are more students in the McKean/Dickinson feeder pattern who are attending Dickinson versus AI. Even by geography, a lot of the Hockessin, Greenville, Centerville area really isn't a concentrated population.

Devon Hynson: Do we know the total number of students that are currently in that pattern, not enrolled in this school, but are in the pattern and was it sufficient to provide a good population in the school? So then the shifting of the attendance zones was to address that issue?

Dorrell Green: The conversation about the attendance zones was related to the public's concern about AI, the public's concern about AI in addition to what we know we need to do across Red Clay as a whole. So because if we take the approach that we're just going to shift more students to AI where are they coming from? No, it wasn't like a referee like hold on. AI is one part of a larger issue. AI as a result—because past decisions that were made to just simply look at enrollment, right, because that's what initially the the the decision around enrollment and what we shared was: you're just not going to deal with a school based on enrollment because you can't manufacture enrollment without looking at programming and without looking at balancing out attendance because our K-5 or K-8 attendance zones were addressed but high schools were never addressed. So if you think you're going to address the AI duPont issue in isolation without looking at the totality of it, it's not going to work.

Devon Hynson: So I am hearing that the adjoiner was put on from the district. The community said, "We want to know the problem with AI duPont," and you guys said what a solution is to address all of our schools.

Dorrell Green: Correct.

Devon Hynson: Okay. Was it ever explained—because I don't really understand why we don't think that creating programming in AI duPont would not attract a population that would go to AI duPont?

Dorrell Green: Because it's just not programming, and that's part of the challenge. We've tried to prop schools up based on programming, and let's say a staff member leaves with that program. Because that's actually happened, right? At one point Dickinson had a construction rental programming; Delcastle takes the staff member, guess what happens to the program? It's gone. And then families of choice to a place based on a program, that's not sustainable. So there has to be some semblance of enrollment and attendance zone and alignment and balance to sustain programming.

Devon Hynson: But did it increase enrollment at Dickinson? Because if I recall—

Dorrell Green: No, it was only 2 cohorts that went through.

Devon Hynson: But it's still increasing. But increased enrollment at Dickinson is actually the MYP program.

Dorrell Green: Okay.

Devon Hynson: But it's now preventing my point from increasing.

Dorrell Green: So then we're speaking the same language then. My point is why don't we do what we need to do to address the enrollment at AI duPont, and it's going to take enrollment from another Red Clay school.

Shawn Snyder: I can potentially give—so we have 6,000 seats in our high schools right now, 5,000 students to fill those seats. What has happened over the course of the last 20 years is there's a tipping point for students; first McKean, then Dickinson, now AI duPont, where it becomes a vacuum and the students are vacuumed out of that school very quickly.

Devon Hynson: But here's my only thing. Because from my perspective, I'm watching us do the same thing we've done before. We created Charter School of Wilmington, right? We got Cab Calloway, we got Conrad, and now you're going to create an innovation center that you suggest is only going to serve 600 students, right? It looks like 300, 300. So that still creates the same old winners and the same old losers. So all you're doing is—it sounds like it's creating another vacuum unless I'm misunderstanding.

Mark Pruitt: Yeah, no. They will not—the innovation center will not be a home school at all. It addresses the issue that we have 6,000 seats and 5,000 students. We are essentially taking out 1,000 seats. So what we're going to do is force families into 2 buildings and then carve out for 600 high-quality education programs. All of those students—no one will attend McKean High School. They will go over to McKean for coursework and return to their high school.

Devon Hynson: Okay, right. But that high school is going to be less one of the high schools that are there now, right?

Dorrell Green: So we're going to essentially forcing—so where are the kids going to go if you're—where are the kids going to be? Go ahead.

Jodi Muffley: Staff member and a 20-year Red Clay parent. The concept is to close McKean. You take those feeder kids, you load Dickinson, you load AI duPont, and every child at AI duPont and every child at Dickinson has access to that innovative center. They will take a bus and they will go. The equality of that is, as we said, the numbers drive programs. Discussing what happened, the demise of AI duPont and everything—as a parent, I've seen Red Clay play whack-a-mole and basically, "Oh, that school's failing, let's dump some money and programs in there and build it up," and then another school fails. This is kind of alleviating that and creating one center that all of our children will have access to.

Devon Hynson: What can you tell me what access looks like?

Jodi Muffley: That means, for instance, my program is allied health science. I'm only offered at AI duPont. I can only grow my building or my program based on my numbers. So next year—I started year one with 50. Next year I have 75. I have the highest CTE numbers in AI duPont for next year and I will have 75 students. Think about—I moved to the innovative center and now all of these kids have access that I could potentially have 200 kids in my program. So that's kind of the concept behind the innovative center.

Devon Hynson: But there's still kids there. See, I'm trying to be—kids there, you won't.

Tawanda Bond: No, what I'm saying is there's other kids in the building. Mr. Hynson, no, no, there's not.

Devon Hynson: In a traditional high school, you're saying that every single kid in that building is going to have access, is going to be able to go to the innovation—

Tawanda Bond: They will be in the AM program or the PM. That's the beauty of it for programming.

Dorrell Green: Okay, so what I would suggest, Board member-elect, so that you know you're well-versed: schedule an appointment so that we can do a deep dive so that you can better understand the concept of what you're likely hearing for the first time.

⏯️1:41:44 Anne Budischak: All right, I'm going to put my parent hat on quickly. I'm not well-versed in the high school CTE requirements, I'm a middle school teacher. So all high school students in a traditional high school are required to complete CTE credits, correct?

Mark Pruitt: They're required to complete a career pathway, okay.

Ann Budischak: A three-year sequential career pathway. So that means all students who attend Dickinson or AI duPont in the new format would have to take classes at the innovation center?

Mark Pruitt: I don't think - again that is still to be determined. And I—no, I'm going to answer.

Ann Budischak: That the CTE classes will no longer be offered at AI duPont or Dickinson. I was under the impression—

Mark Pruitt: Well, I think that is to be determined by a group of people who make these decisions. I'll give you an example: at the Cecil County program, they keep 2 or 3 CTE pathways on campus for those students who do not want to participate, but they are limited in nature. They're easily propped-up facilities.

Ann Budischak: So anecdotally for me as a future high school parent, my child busing for part of their school day to another building is not attractive to me as a parent. So I'm wondering if the committee has taken that into consideration. Might we lose families who don't want their children to lose instructional time on a school bus?

Dorrell Green: So, and again, that's the whole point of tonight, right? That's the whole point of the survey is to get that type of feedback.

Ann Budischak: And and then another question. So I'm pretty sure that students at Dickinson in our high school program who are like—can they do like—does art satisfy or band satisfy CTE or career pathway requirements?

Mark Pruitt: They—it depends on the sequential nature. It depends on the sequential nature, but it also satisfies graduation requirement. It satisfies graduation requirement. So there's a difference between a career pathway and a graduation requirement.

Ann Budischak: I'm just concerned that we might have some additional segregation of students if we have students who are maybe in more academically targeted pathways to fulfill those requirements versus students who are in more career training pathways to fulfill those requirements.

Dorrell Green: This isn't Vo-tech, right? And so I think that's the other thing. If you look at the chart where we talked about allied health, when you talk about PT, when you talk about digital marketing, media design, or you talk about the audio, radio, video, teacher pathways, right? Which is—I mean there's a whole host or list of things that students have to look at that 3-year sequential pathway currently - That aren't necessarily being fulfilled as a result of us not necessarily being able to staff, resource, and actually go deep. Culinary, for example: students who aren't completing level 4. So ultimately you want students upon graduation to have a credential, a certification, or an experience through a career pathway that's going to allow them to be marketable, as to Mr. Pruitt's initial point around the patient care pathway, right? We know that there are 18-year-olds—and we saw that during COVID—that got their CNA license and they went right to work, right? But then that student can ultimately decide: do they want to go to a two-year RN program, ultimately become a nurse? This allows us to partner with public-private partnerships, work-based learning opportunities, but also career high-skill, high-wage types of jobs through labor market analysis. So again, the purpose of tonight is to kind of share what the committee has gone through over the last 6 months, allow the community to give their feedback so that the committee can take this feedback and then ultimately we provide a recommendation to the Board. We can say, "Here are the things that we've also heard from the community." Thank you.

⏯️1:47:23 Kecia Nesmith: Yeah, I'm going to put my parent hat on too, and I'm also going to put my educator and knowledge hat on. There's a couple of things that were talked about and I think that we need to address them because it was kind of brought up but we didn't really talk about it. The segregation-desegregation law had a lot to do with where we are today and so the elephant in the room is that magnet programs, charter schools, etc. were created to segregate, right? To segregate. So why does MYP Dickinson program not want to go to Skyline? Potentially - because it is a predominantly black school now since they made some changes. And why were those changes made? I was—my daughter was in that school in Skyline when it changed. It was a tremendous—it was not under the leadership of Dr. Green, but it was a tremendous change in the culture, in the preparation for teachers. So if we want to talk about being upset about magnet schools or wanting comprehensive schools, it's because somebody didn't get what they wanted, right? My children are benefiting from the segregated schools, CSW and Conrad, but if they hadn't then I would have made a choice that was best for my kid. But I'm not going to try to change the system because of it.

But the bottom line is people are not satisfied with comprehensive schools because of the differences among the students that are in it. But if we—and I'm not saying that I totally support all of the ideas that have been presented by the committee, but we do have to come to consensus. The other elephant in the room—and I brought this up at every single committee meeting—is that we do not have families here that are from the inner city, and sometimes we need to do a little bit more to engage families who are not typically engaged. So through this meeting I have requested that this recording be sent to all families and that we connect with the different community centers and other partners to ensure that this information is distributed and that we can continue to get feedback. Because once we do have a plan, like Dr. Green said and Mr. Pruitt said, there are many decisions and plans that have to be put into place to address some of the questions.

But at the end of the day, money is only spreading but so far. And so if we want to have quality programming around the arts, music like Cab Calloway has, we're not going to be able to have that quality at all 3, if that was it, 3 comprehensive high schools. There's not enough money and it's not enough teachers to do that. So there is some area for improvement around providing access to all of these things, but at the same time if you want to have a pathway that is very specific to your talent, your gift, or your desire like a Cab Calloway, then we have to consider how we might do that. This—and I think for where we are right now, I think this plan is at the beginning of addressing that. Is it perfect? No. But comprehensive high schools—I'm a high school principal—comprehensive high schools are not for everybody. They're just not. Sometimes they're too big and kids can't manage being in schools that are too big, and sometimes they are not interested because their art mind needs that or their science mind needs this. So I think with the innovation center, which is not a Vo-tech, the innovation center can have multiple college courses or some of those courses could be at every comprehensive high school including Conrad, because I'd like to see Conrad have some more college access, and it can have—Cab Calloway can do the same. So we're not going to fix the desegregation and the people with the white flight from AI duPont. A lot of the kids who live in that feeder pattern go to Tatnall, they go to Tower Hill, they go to St. Mark's because that's where those families can either afford or want to send their kids. If we're going to—we're not going to address the racial divide here, but that is a real thing, and I can say that because I'm not at the school district. But it's a real thing and so we can't ignore that. Why do we want to go to Conrad? Why do we want to go to Cab Calloway? Why do we want to go to CSW? Did you look at the populations at these schools?

⏯️1:52:36 Dorrell Green: One moment too, and I would just say I think it's also disingenuous to say that Conrad and Cab Calloway don't have semblances of diversity, because they do now. There's—IB MYP does as well, right? So what I would say is this: I think there's a difference between diversity and choice. Choice is a lottery process and when we don't get that, the one of 3 choices that we select becomes part of that problem, right? Because everyone can't get every choice. And then what we end up doing by default is trying to make everything equitable at the expense of all of our programs. So if you have a school of performing arts, you're there to participate in performing arts and then the expectation is for us to prop up a performing arts program at another one of our districts and exhaust resources where we're not doing anything quality across our district. The reality is we have to do something.

There are some questions online because this isn't necessarily—there's nothing finalized. This was a committee that met for 6 months that was given a charge from the Board. This was their thinking, their brainstorming around how we can create equitable processes, programming opportunities, and access, and not do what has happened in the past where we look to address a singular issue at the expense of all of our communities. Furthermore, there's need throughout Red Clay. I'm probably the sole person who gets the advantage to actually see to the point that our community eligibility feeding provision numbers in this district will likely result in every child being able to eat for free in our district. So sometimes you get this with blinders on and see things just from a singular lens of my singular school experience and I want to go to the next experience with the cohort of children that my child has gone to elementary and we want to matriculate through. The reality is we want that experience for every child. Mr. Smallwood, just as—okay, 

⏯️1:54:48 Phillip Smallwood: one of the questions that came up a few times was about the Meadowwood program that's currently at McKean. Were there any thoughts or plans about that? 

Mark Pruitt: Yeah, well, I think it's—yes, we've had discussions about Meadowwood, but we have not even put forward a recommendation at this point. So have we engaged with student services at the district office with Miss Kathy Maddox, the longtime principal at the Meadowwood program? Absolutely we have. I think that those students deserve everything that we're trying to provide for all of the students who currently go to these three schools, and so our commitment would be to have that program be at either Dickinson or McKean, to engage parents in that program. But I think that's still to be determined.

These are 19 people, these are seven public members, three members of RCEA, three building principals who gave of their time, three district administrators coming up with a helicopter view idea that we're getting feedback on now. Make adjustments to that recommendation based on this feedback, provide the recommendation to the School Board. The Board would then at least have one month to consider that; they then take feedback from the community before they would vote and potentially allow us to engage in the hard work that would need to be done to have something like this completed. I mean, yeah, we we did not have the people at the table at one point. With the committee there was a question about, "Well, who's going to watch the kids if the bus doesn't show up? The shuttle bus doesn't shuffle." It's a great question but it's not—we're not there yet, right? We're not there with seven community members, three teachers... those are things that you start at a helicopter level and you drill down into the details as you go. Our goal is to make the Board's charge—is that we make a recommendation at the July Board meeting. The Board charged us in November with having a committee and that committee making a recommendation to them at the July Board meeting.

⏯️1:57:29 Dorrell Green: We have enough information to make a recommendation and to move forward from the recommendation. 

Devon Hynson: I don't - I don't understand.

Mark Pruitt: Do we want to take one more? Is there one more question online?

Mr. Smallwood: You kind of led into the next question, which is what is the timeline? What happens after this meeting for the committee and the reccomendations.

Dorrell Green: Survey input. You get additional surveys, there's a recommendation that would go before the Board in July. The Board could vote that up or down, we get another charge, the Board says need more time—that's the Board's prerogative. We were given a charge, the committee was formed, the committee took data research information. The reality is status quo, to do nothing, impacts the entire district.

Devon Hynson: [inaudible]

Dorrell Green: Well the committee doesn't feel they need more time. The Board goes back based on what they get. 

Devon Hynson: [inaudible]

Dorrell Green: He didn't express that.

Devon Hynson: [inaudible]

Dorrell Green: He is standing right here so he can - 

Mark Pruitt: —no, I did not mean to say that. I'm saying we're not to that level of detail. If the Board were to vote to move forward with the recommendation, then the district would then engage with the work necessary to pull off a plan like that, to put leaves on that tree, and enter into the committee work that would need to be done—the engagement with parents and the larger community, the business community, the post-secondary educational community, the transportation office.

Dorrell Green: Because the reality is if we would have come before and we had a plan, what would the response be? We created a plan without input. So the charge was to give the Board a recommendation of something to address attendance zone, secondary enrollment, and programming, which includes—if we can go back to a couple slides that talked about being balanced—straight line feeder patterns for middle schools. Because we know currently if I'm an eighth-grade class at AI Middle, I'm going to three different high schools. And because I'm not going to a singular school or have the opportunity with my class, guess what? I'm going to choose Delcastle. And so...

Audience member: [inaudible] 

Dorrell Green: And it's not me, we. It was a committee that had research, that used data to come forward with a recommendation. This is not a singular idea or thought of one person. And now the community has an opportunity based on what they've heard, to give feedback. There's no definitive final decision that's being made in this room. This is the opportunity really to share with the community what the committee has done the last six months. Everything's online for you to see, to wrestle with, to question. You don't like it, you like it, you think this should happen— provide the feedback.

⏯️2:01:22 Audience Member Amy Reynoso: Okay here we go. I have three questions and two opinions. The first question is—well actually I want to tell you—(lost mic)

Dorrell Green: You might have to get up and come closer. 

Amy Reynoso: How about now? I think the committee did a good job so I wanted to say thank you to everyone for volunteering their time. The first question is: who on the committee suggested the innovation center and what is their role?

Dorrell Green: Who in the committee suggested the innovation center and what is their role? I think when you look at where the innovation center came from, it really is a vision of what makes most sense for the district. I'll take credit for it as the superintendent to say that this is a thought in terms of how we support all of Red Clay, if we want to put it on somebody.

Amy Reynoso: Okay, but it's coming from the committee so I'm just asking if the person who suggested it on the committee works for the district. That's all I was wondering. The second question is: why is Brandywine Springs Middle School a magnet and not a feeder school? And I know that doesn't have anything to do with the innovation center but we're talking about feeders and magnets—that was my just another question. And then the last question is: are we able to change the high school feeder patterns without a drastic programming change? Like the elementary feeder lines in 2015, or is there a fear of, I don't know, losing a building? I feel like there's something else that we need to look at as—

Dr. Dorrell Green: What is that something else that you're recommending that we look at?

Amy Reynoso: I'm not recommending anything; I'm just wondering if there's something I'm missing, that's all. And then the the two opinions I wanted to say is: I don't think that you can pack up MYP and drive down the road to Skyline. I think it would be devastating to the staff and the families at Dickinson who loved and built this program, and it's like moving Spanish immersion from Marbrook to Richie. I just want to state publicly that I oppose moving the MYP program out of Dickinson to Skyline. And the last opinion is some of the feedback I've heard from other moms is that this idea might backfire because we'll lose more students due to the transportation to and from the buildings; it's a huge concern. So that was—that's all I have to say.

Dr. Dorrell Green: Thank you, appreciate it.

⏯️2:04:39 Jenny Howard:  Could you go back to the slide that says "examples of impact"? My question is about the courses. So for like a student that is not maybe on the career pathway but possibly the college pathway and—

Dorrell Green: Career pathway. So I want folks to understand: career doesn't mean you're going straight to the workforce after high school. Career pathways are in some instances college pathways.

Jenny Howard: Okay.

Dorrell Green: So I think sometimes we got to be—make sure we're we're saying the same—

Jenny Howard: Yeah, I'm confused.

Dorrell Green: So a a physical therapy pathway could be career and/or college pathway because I could become a PT assistant and go to DelTech to get certification and go in career, or I could go to college for six years and get my—I mean my doctorate in occupational therapy. So CTE career technical pathways are learning experience that every student in the state has to go through, so this isn't just simply a Red Clay thing. The problem and what we're trying to solve—and I'll give you the example of: there were two culinary programs in our district two years ago. One at AI duPont High School that was underenrolled, that was floundering. One at McKean High School with a commercial grade kitchen. Why would we try to use resources to prop up a commercial grade kitchen when students are actually making the choice to go to McKean's fuller culinary program?

Jenny Howard: I know, so actually it's this—the slide that says the example. So I guess maybe I should ask my question this way: so like my child is likely to take advanced level courses. So when you look at the slide that says "examples of impact," how would this innovation center more evenly equalize the Advanced Placement course offerings at either Dickinson or AI duPont? Because I'm going to be honest with you, if my—if the opportunity to take these advanced level courses isn't there, then my kid doesn't want to choose either of them. And right now the examples of impact, they're not—

Dorrell Green: And that's part of the problem right now, because we don't have equitable access to advanced course placement courses across our five schools. So even if you're looking at our strategic plan, we talked about looking at making sure that there's a six-pack—for a lack of a better analogy—of the AP courses. AP Seminar being a anchor course that every student in the district would be able to take and have access to. So I'm not—

Jenny Howard: The difference is like there's 25 and 22 at Conrad and Cab Calloway, but only 9, 9, 4 and—and that

Dorrell Green: and that's now.

Jenny Howard: But how will - how will this change that - is my question. The innovation center idea—I'm sorry, maybe I'm just not getting it.

Dorrell Green: Because it's allowing us to have a core course of AP course offerings for all students at their school feeder schools, and then innovation center were where you would go to actually get the support for your CTE pathway. So—

Jenny Howard: So you would be able to offer 25 Advanced Placement classes at the traditional high schools?

Audience Member: Questions or statements that are being made [inaudible]

Dorrell Green: Yes we are, sir. She's asking—I'm hearing her and she's asking and we're responding to her. This is a conversation and a dialogue.

Jenny Howard: So would you be able to with this new idea? I'm just confused.

Mark Pruitt: Yeah, so the the idea—I use AI duPont High School as as the most extreme example. They have 550 students in that school at this point. They have five English teachers on staff. They're very limited in their ability to offer courses beyond the core English courses: English 9, English 10, five, six sections per grade. The bigger you are as a school—900, 1,000, 1,100—in a comprehensive school, the more staff you earn and the more flexibility it gives you to deal with programming.

So I'm going to go—I'm going to go a little bit further and say that there was a time in this district—and I go back to Sean Snyder's point when he said I was a Conrad principal—but I taught and coached at McKean for 12 years and and and I'm a graduate of the high school and care deeply about the school. I can say there was a time in this district, in 2004, where there were 3,400 in-district students at those three schools. The the fact of the matter is—and it's not that we couldn't choose a different route that this committee chose—but there are 2,000 in-district students attending those three schools and your question was fantastic because it's very challenging to offer the elective coursework, the AP coursework. They only have 550 students. That's only about 160 kids a grade. 160 students want to—in any grade want to take AP US History, it's only 4 that have interest. Therefore you cannot allot a teaching section of a unit of a teaching position for 4 students. If you double that number, you provide the the capacity and the flexibility to do that. Those are great questions.

Jenny Howard: That makes sense okay. So possibly?

Mark Pruitt: Yeah we can go.

Jenny Chorman: Hi, good evening. I wanted to ask if Skyline will still be offering the Spanish immersion program at the middle school level if MYP transfers?

Mark Pruitt: Yes.

Dorrell Green: We've already invested in—we've already invested in the program. Both programs would would be at the school.

Jenny Chorman: And the same for AI duPont for the high school?

Mark Pruitt: That's correct. One one major change would be the Early College Academy, which currently has 100 seats and one 100 seats at McKean and 100 seats at AI duPont High School, would now have 200 seats at AI duPont High School.

⏯️2:10:28 Audience Member Jenny Chorman: Okay. And the second is kind of a comment more than a question. In some of the committee meetings I heard that CSW want to expand to a middle school program. I will strongly suggest do not accept that because that will fracture more of the system where it already is.

Mark Pruitt: I agree.

Dorrell Green: Thank you for that, Miss Corman. Just so that you know and again for the public, certification: they applied for an expansion grant that didn't go anywhere. So just so that folks know, that was something that they looked at several years ago through an expansion grant but that didn't go beyond them getting that grant and analyzing what that would look like.

⏯️2:21:03 Audience Member (Becky): Hey, thank you. Kind of going on just making sure you hear our voices. I agree with a lot of people, the transportation scares me, especially if you have them mornings and afternoons and then if you have sports afterwards. How are they busing? Do they get bused all the way back to their school or they get bused from the innovation center to home? Just there's a lot to think about and to decide if this proceeds. And then McKean is dear to my heart, so it's sad-ish to hear it might be like going. It's a community that I love and I have a rising 10th grader now. So if this is going to happen in 2 years, that would be a senior year—like how does that impact the students that are there now? And then are you going to keep accepting into McKean if this passes? And then like they're just going to have to integrate like mid-year mid-classes—it's just a consideration.

Mark Pruitt: Let me deal—answer the transportation question first. It is the single biggest obstacle that we need to hurdle, right? Both the logistics of it, the day-to-day of it, the the big picture of it, the fiscal responsibility. What does it look like? Well we're not taking 28 buses to McKean every day, but we are running shuttles as needed across the district. What's behavior look like on that bus? I believe that you want to give the kids the best programming possible, and I think if you start to say—and I understand special needs, that that's a separate issue that we also are responsible for ringing the bell and meeting the need of. However, I think when you start talking about behavior, I believe this—I've always believed this—if if we're not going to do something that we believe—that I believe is potentially great for kids—because of their behavior, it's time for me—that's not how I would operate. So I understand behavioral needs of of students that you know, for a variety reason, but I don't—I think you need to accommodate that and and and and provide support so that those students can be successful if they choose to to get on that trans—if they choose to get on the shuttle bus and it meets you know meets their educational needs. But by and large, you know I believe that students will respond if the adults are providing a great experience for them. The logistics are challenging. I said that was the first thing I said to you is that is something. But yes, absolutely a sketch—a pencil sketch has a student back to Dickinson or AI duPont at 2:00. School day ends at 2:10 so they can go to a student government meeting, they can go to a JV football practice, they can go wherever they need to go. They still—they would still have the opportunity to participate in a comprehensive high school experience and a more robust comprehensive high school experience.

⏯️2:15:18 Tawanda Bond: I just wanted to share one thing before we before we wrap up and I know you have a question also. We had a couple of questions about where the ideas came from and the recommendations—where did they come from? I just wanted to just remind everyone that all of our information was very transparent, public, it is on our website. But the recommendations really came from the committee discussion. So although we're having discussion about you know whose idea it was or where it may have come from, we had some really rich discussion with our nominating members, our parents, our Board members were there, our district administrators. It was no single person who came up with any of these recommendations that you saw before you out of those 12 big ideas, and no idea was too small. So I just wanted to reiterate that we were very very clear and very deliberate and intentional about making sure everyone's voice was heard on the committee. So I just wanted to reiterate that piece.

Audience Member (Orr): Hi, so just following up with Becky's question about are you going to continue to accept people and what's going to happen to students already in that feeder? But I also want to take a moment and like—McKean is very near and dear to our hearts. I mean I started my—a significant part of my career at McKean as an ED. I saw it grow with the first preschool center into what it is now. We poured a lot of veter energy into McKean and it seems like it's a system that works, and I'm all about equity in terms of accessing it as an innovative center. I think we could explore a little bit more on how we expand equity across all the districts including the magnet schools. But my question now is more on a positive spin: let's say the innovative center really takes off and the public really says, "Hey Red Clay's got a great thing going here, they've got this innovation center which is really top of the line, we've got these 2 high - and then enrollment starts to increase, but now you have this innovation center part of the Red Clay culture. It's not like there's a lot of real estate to build another building. What has the district thought about that, or are we just getting too far ahead of ourselves?

Mark Pruitt: I think you have to consider that and I'll let Dr. Green speak to it, but I will say this: we educate 5,000 students in our school district, 1,000 of which are out-of-district students. So we can turn the hose off on out-of—we will always turn off the nozzle on out-of-district students to meet the needs of in-district students. So there's quite a bit of flexibility there because of the out-of-district students at all of our buildings including McKean, Dickinson, and AI duPont. But it is—it is something that you need to be mindful of going forward. I am going to let Antonio, who was a public member of the committee, speak. He he requested it and he's been just a tremendous resource, including handing off microphones tonight.

Antonio Gomes: I just want to make sure—this is a very small population of folks from our community. I think we can all agree with that. There's thousands of families that here; think about how many other opinions we haven't heard yet, right? And I want to reassure you that when we were in this committee and we having these discussions, they were as lively as we're having it today because there are different opinions. There's things that are strong that I feel strongly about that others don't, and I think we—what I want to commend the committee for is we tried our best to come up with an approach based on the timeline we have but with also—we used information. So if he had questions, we did the research, and that's some of the things that we point out. And I honestly encourage you guys to look at the information out there and say, "Hey does this information make sense? What other questions might there be that we're not thinking of?" That's the point of this meeting, right? That's also the point of what we're asking for you guys to complete the survey because that's how we're going to know: does this make sense before we go to the Board to even suggest this to look into the details that I think some of you are asking for? We might find out that this is not the path to go forward. I know we had a lot of comments during our committee meetings. We had a lot of representation I think from CSW for example in every single one of those meetings. But I just want to let you guys know I appreciate hearing this - for me - because it allows me to also be able to contribute a little bit better when I hear different opinions on everybody here. Everybody has families in different schools; I have my kids in this district too, so I know the feeling. But again thank you. I don't I want to make sure everybody's okay. The fact that we might not have [inaudible] Yes. I just want to make sure everybody's understanding that we're we're hearing you, right? And we're hoping to represent the interest of the community as best as possible. I'm not going to say I'm perfect, but I'm certainly going to listen to it and try to find out a way to get us there. And I think I can speak with a lot of the folks that were in those committee meetings: they they were fighting for a lot of the same things you guys were talking about. We just had to come up with a consensus because I think the message is: doing nothing is not an option. Let's do something.

Dorrell Green: So we want to thank everyone in the audience. One, for your thoughtful considerable questions, for your advocacy, for your feedback, for your input. We're encouraging everyone to take the survey again—that's meaningful feedback that we need, that we want, that we desire to make sure that we're addressing the broader community need in Red Clay. The last thing that we want to do is to make a singular or isolated decision to address a singular—what we perceive to be a singular—issue and 15, 10, 15, 20 years from now folks are wrestling with the tension that we're now being forced to wrestle with because decisions - no judgment - that were made to solve a problem or to be innovative or to be creative in essence has created a level of need across our community that we're now being forced to address. So thank you to those who are joining us online. Mr. Leonard has his hand up.  

Board Member Vic Leonard: [inaudible]

Dorrell Green: So so the timeline is just like deferred maintenance, right? If we don't address an issue now, we're going to continue to perpetuate and create an issue that will go on for a year, then that decision is lingering for two years, and we keep having situations where students aren't benefiting from all that—so again this isn't to rush a timeline. So please what we're asking you to do in this moment is to give us the feedback so that the committee and the group can present a well-informed, considerate recommendation to the Board for them to wrestle with, make a decision. If it comes back to us obviously we'll do our due diligence. But again, as Mr. Antonio indicated, the committee met the charge; they discussed the issue to address something that ultimately will be a benefit to the entire district. So thank you everyone for coming out this evening. We look forward to getting your feedback. Thank you for those who are in the audience who are dealing with the the mic situation. Those that are online—again, thank you for joining us this evening. Fill out the survey, feel free to go online. We have a dedicated website on the on our district web page that gives you all of the information that has been taking place over the past six months. Have a good night, thank you.

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee webpage 

June 10, 2025 Meeting Materials 

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Town Hall Rolling Slides June 10, 2025 

📹Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee June 10, 2025 Meeting Recording

📄Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee June 10, 2025 Meeting FAQs For convenience, the full text of FAQs are typed below.

June 10, 2025 FAQ’s from the Secondary A-Z & Programming Committee’s Community Update  

What is the earliest start date to implement the recommendations being discussed? August of 2027. 

How will the district handle bus transportation for students with special needs? Red Clay will meet the transportation needs of all students interested in Innovation Center programming. 

How many people from the community are on the committee? There is 1 community member from each of Red Clay’s 7 nominating Red Clay zones. 

Why wasn’t it discussed to absorb the magnet schools(Cab and Conrad) back into Red Clay? One of the ideas included capping the enrollment at each of these schools. This idea did not generate any interest from the committee. 

What prompted the board to create the committee? After years of under enrollment at one or more of Red Clay;s comprehensive schools, the board created the committee to provide recommendations for bolstering enrollment and providing more equitable programming across all schools. 

For the recommendation of moving the Dickinson MYP program to Skyline - Would this program be offered to the whole middle school? Yes, any student enrolled at Skyline or Skyline MYP and interested in the MYP would receive the programming. 

What would happen to the current MYP staff at Dickinson? Any plans involving staffing for all recommendations would involve input from key stakeholder groups including RCEA. Teachers would need to be trained through IB. 

Was stakeholder feedback considered in these recommendations? A survey has gone out to the Red Clay community at-large. The deadline for completion was 6/12/25. 

Will there be an application process for students at the comprehensive high schools(JDS and AIH) to participate in programming at the McKean Innovation Center? 

No, the plan is for any student interested to have access to this programming. 

How would this recommendation of the McKean Innovation Center impact the Meadowood program currently located at McKean? Relocation of the Meadowood program to another comprehensive high school would involve further discussion with key stakeholders groups. Red Clay is committed to continuing the high level of programming provided by Meadowood. 

Will the committee’s recommendation result in high school attendance zones (feeder pattern) changes? Yes, recommendation would result in more “straight line feeder” attendance zones and a more equitable distribution of students. 

Would the comprehensive high schools in this model be able to offer more advanced coursework? Yes, additional enrollment would result in additional staffing to offer more comprehensive college and career courses. 

Where would the high school IB program be located? The high school IB program would remain at Dickinson. 

Would Skyline offer Spanish Immersion if MYP moved to Skyline? Yes, the Skyline immersion program would remain at Skyline. 

If McKean closes how would that impact current students? Students at McKean would attend the school in their new attendance zone. 

What if this is implemented and becomes popular? What if enrollment increases at our comprehensive high schools? The University of Delaware’s state public school enrollment projections indicate a reduction in Red Clay students over the next 30 years. Additionally, at this time, Red Clay has approximately 1000 out of district high school students. The district would cap out of district choice applications if necessary. 

Has stakeholder feedback been gathered about moving MYP from Dickinson to Skyline? Red Clay has created a survey for feedback on the recommendations. 

What will the academic and extracurricular implications be for MYP students if the program moves to Skyline? Students will continue to have their same middle school programming and any additional programs offered at Skyline. 

Why was McKean chosen as the Innovation Center? McKean facilities include diverse high quality career and technical spaces. Additionally, the school is centrally located between Dickinson and AI High.

At times 12 of 19 voted(those in attendance) - that’s only 63% of the committee. The missing votes could potentially change those votes and recommendations. Why were the remaining members unable to vote? They were not in attendance at those meetings. 

With the sports at a home school, no buses would leave for away games before 2:10? Transportation is one of many considerations that will need to be realized if the plan moves forward. 

If a student is choices to Dickinson MYP, but does not wish to attend Skyline for MYP will they be notified of the program change while the choice window is open? Yes 

What would happen to the students that currently feed to Skyline? Would Skyline still exist as a feeder or would MYP take over the building? Skyline would still exist as an attendance zone school.

 What are the next steps? The committee is currently scheduled to present to the school board at the July 9, 2025 school board meeting. The school board would have to vote to move forward with the recommendation.

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Board Committee Report
   ⏯ 0:35:24

   1. • Board Member Jose Matthews provided an update on the Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee May 1 meeting. The meeting had strong attendance, and he noted an additional date was added for May 21; The July timeline is a point of discussion and the committee is narrowing down the recommendations. 

      • Board Member Vic Leonard asked how many scenarios remain; Dorrell Green explained that CTE Innovation and reduction of a middle school are remaining scenarios and discussed plans for stakeholder input.

⏯ 0:35:24

Jose Matthews: So we did have a couple of meetings since our last meeting. Up first we have the April 15th meeting. We had several Board members in attendance and I believe that one was actually already presented on at the last meeting. But really, most importantly, we had our May 1st meeting was really well attended. We had to add an additional time for us to stick to the timeline that we have presented by the Board. The timeline continues to be a point of discussion. At this time we still are on target projecting to provide recommendations from the committee to the Board in at the July meeting. So they have until the end of June to submit that.

And the biggest focus and area of progress during the last meeting is that from all of the public recommendations that the committee has set out for consideration, they started to narrow down some of the ideas and recommendations that they want to provide.

So there still are a couple of meetings that are currently scheduled.This does not mean that we may not have additional meetings within this timeline, but our next meeting is Wednesday, May 21st at 6 p.m.as always at the District office Boardroom and our last meeting will be June 17th, 2025 at 6 p.m. District office in the Boardroom.

Also a big reminder, as Dr. Green presented in his Superintendent report, the website has been beautifully updated. This includes all of the committee microsites or pages within the website. So there is a lot of great information, and for anyone who may have missed any of the past meetings the minutes are there, but then the great thing about the site also is that it has the link directly to the meeting video recording for those who would like to tune in. There's contact information, for our chair Dr. Mark Pruitt, if there's any questions, that aren't answered within the materials that are provided.

Any questions?

Vic Leonard: Yeah, I’d just like to ask a question. I know we started, the last - I wasn’t able to make the last meeting - Secondary Attendance Zone, and I know we started, I believe, with 11 scenarios and we eliminated a few. So how many are there now as far as scenarios?

Dorrell Green: So there really were two really to prioritize. One was to looking at, the nature of a CTE Innovation Center or looking at expansion of IB and then the reduction of 8 to 7 in terms of middle school programs because they were interrelated. So if you did one there was going to be a domino effect in terms of changes that needed to be made in other areas. So the committee really had some fruitful discussion and wanted some additional information. We are also in the process of formulating a community survey to be able to support and get broader feedback, but then the process of what would a town hall and/or some focus groups look like to ensure that we're getting broad stakeholder input around concrete ideas and not kind of some philosophical things that were floating out there. So it kind of got reduced to really two secondary things that will have some domino effects in terms of the implications for the broader community.

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee webpage 

May 21, 2025 Meeting Materials 

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Meeting Rolling Slides May 1, 2025 

📹Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee May 1 Meeting Recording

📄Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee May 1 Meeting Minutes For convenience, the full meeting minutes are typed below.

May 1, 2025 / 6:00 PM / RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 Zoom Meeting (For public only. Committee members are in person.) 

Attendance/Welcome Jason Bastianelli, Tawanda Bond, Emily Carroll, Dorrell Green, Antonio Gomes, Jose Matthews, Caitlin Merto, Mark Pruitt Jr , Jennifer Recchiuti, Madeleine Reitemeyer, Eric Sanford, Shawn Snyder, Reggie Worlds 

Dr. Bond made a motion to begin the meeting, seconded by Mr. Worlds. Motion passed. 

Agenda Items 

Opening Items

• Public Comment - None

• Approve Minutes from April 15th. Mr. Snyder made a motion to approve the minutes from April 15th, seconded by Mr. Sanford. Motion passed. 

New Business

• The Committee’s Charge/Goal - Mr. Pruitt

• Meeting Norms - Mr. Pruitt 

• Tentative Timeline - Mr. Pruitt 

• Brainstorming Recap - All 

• Analysis & Discussion - All 

• Straw Poll Data Discussion - All 

• Discussion around an online school 6-12(students would have A-Z homeschool). Discussion of how this item aligns with the committee’s charge statement. The committee agrees the idea has merit and enough interest to recommend the board look at this as a separate topic at a future board meeting. 

• Narrowing Possibilities -Discussion started with options that garnered little to no response from the straw poll. 

  • Capping Conrad and Cab at smaller enrollments. This action did not receive any consideration via the straw poll and was removed from further consideration. 

  • Move AI middle to AI High to create one 6-12 A-Z program. This action received 2 Red Clay Consolidated School District 1 votes of interest to move forward. Discussion - this move would limit high school capacity enrollment at AI High. Not aligned with the committee’s charge. It was removed from further consideration. 

  • Reduce to 2 attendance zone high schools and relocate the Charter School of Wilmington to the open site- Mr. Pruitt made a motion to remove the idea due to not enough support by the committee. Discussion- what to put here? Motion seconded by Ms. Metro. Motion passed 11 yes 2 abstain. It was removed from further consideration. 

  • Mr. Pruitt made a motion to remove “provide equitable choice bussing for all students to all schools.” Discussion - available resources and funding to offer neighborhood bus stops to 26 schools for any Red Clay student who accepts a choice seat within the district is lacking. Mr. Gomes seconded the motion. Motion passed 11 yes 2 no. It was removed from further consideration. 

  • There was broad discussion on remaining ideas. 

Public Comment - Dr. Triebenbacher, Nate Bird, Jennifer Howard 

Adjourn - Mr. Matthews made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Merto. Motion passed. 

• Action Items Provide current enrollment statistics for Red Clay CTE programs. 

• Provide possible models for CTE center. 

Next Meeting May 21, 2025 @6pm at RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 0:13:16 - 25:20

   1. • Charles Lockerman (Friends of AI) Advocated for increased bussing and redrawn attendance zones to boost enrollment and equity,

      • Jenny Howard (parent): Raised concerns about the long-standing facilities and financial arrangement between the district and CSW

      • Gianna Howard (student): Opposed CSW speaking at AZ Committee about their desire for one of Red Clay's buildings. 

2. Board Committee Report
   ⏯ 1:01:12 -1:08:31

   1. • Board Member Vic Leonard provided an update on the Secondary Attendance Zone and Programming Committee March 20 meeting; The committee reviewed 12 attendance zone and consolidation scenarios, examined feasibility costs, CTE program disparities, and school size data. Ted Ammon, COO, joined the meeting to discuss reiterated the cost feasability with those scenarios. Superintendent Dorrell Green joined the meeting to discuss possible scenarios related to the outcome of Redding and city schools. 

      • Board Member Vic Leonard provided an update on the Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee April 15 meeting. and Charter School of Wilmington wanting to expand to middle school. Research around school size and student achievement was discussed; Charter School of Wilmington made public comment about wanting a better facility; the committee discussed needing more time before making a recommendation to the Board in July.

      • Board Member Kecia Nesmith urged for more diligent communication about the committee's work; Both Board members acknowledged and commended Mr. Pruitt’s organization in guiding the committee’s work. 

      • Superintendent Dorrell Green remarked that sustaining CTE programs requires significant facilities investment and emphasized that the committee’s charge is limited to balancing enrollment, reviewing attendance zones, and evaluating programming within Red Clay providing ancillary space for schools outside of Red Clay.

⏯ 0:13:16 - 25:20 Click to hear all comments or Click a name below to hear individuals.

Charles Lockerman: Good evening, Members of the Board. I've been here before. My name is Charles Lockerman. I'm speaking on behalf of Friends of AI. AI is doing a lot of great things. We plan next year to have more involvement with students. We're trying to help with some of their end of the year stuff helping kids with prom etc. We also want to communicate the benefits of AI not only for the students but the community. I also want to start by speaking to a survey that was done I think in the last couple years that was sent out to parents within the zones that said hey you know are you interested in sending your child to AI and a lot of them responded and said we are but the bus hub stops aren't conducive to our work schedules or the locations just aren't they can't the parents can't get to work and drop the kids off where the buses are. So that's direct feedback to say hey increased busing you know may help increase enrollment at AI. Also I wanted to continue to emphasize the need for redrawing the attendance zones as there needs to be a consolidated effort to have a balanced school district to be considered rightly consolidated. Right now things just aren't equal attendance-wise and our goal is to change that but we got to do it together. Last thing I wanted to speak of is just an idea that I had to campaign at the middle school level where you guys are looking at what the kids are doing right now. And just, you know, when I was coming out of high school, I, you know, there were college fairs.You can meet people in the gymnasium at the table, talk to them about the different programs that each institution has. But I don't know if that same approach has ever been done at the middle school level. And if the middle school kids, you know, have a voice and an opinion going into the world because they're going to be more independent in high school than, you know, having, you know, members of each school, AI, etc. McKean, you know, go to the middle schools to try to like, you know, for better, lack of a better way to put it, recruit the kids and just tell them why it's, you know, good to come there, what the benefits are, etc. You know, I think that also helps to educate the kids and that's what we're all here to do. And you know, they have to be aware of the world and they're walking into, so they should have input into where they're going a little bit. Um and the more information they have, the better decisions they can make. Thank you for your time tonight. Thank you. 

Jenny Howard: Hi, good evening. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak tonight. I want to talk about the Charter School of Wilmington, known as CSW, and how it has historically benefited from a special arrangement with the Red Clay Consolidated School District. First, a reminder to the public. Charter schools are public in name, but they are privately operated. They're funded with public dollars, but they're managed by private boards, not the district. Students who attend charter schools like CSW are not considered Red Clay students even though the district authorizes the school. And while Red Clay oversees CSW's charter, it's important to understand that Red Clay does not owe CSW any facilities. Yet, for nearly 30 years, Red Clay has provided CSW with access to one of its own buildings, the former Wilmington High School, at little to no cost. CSW paid $1 a year in rent for the first 12 years. Today, CSW and CAB Callaway share the Wilmington campus, but CSW enrolls more students and uses more space, yet still only pays for 31% of the building's cost based on an outdated formula from a time when four other programs were in that building. That number has never been updated. To make matters worse, under the new lease, Red Clay is now paying CSW $50,000 a year per CAB students to participate in CSW athletics. This is a complete reversal from past agreements where CSW reimbursed the district. And while CSW students can take over 20classes at CAB, CAB students can only take three courses at CSW. That imbalance speaks volumes. Meanwhile, CSW is actively trying to expand and is now seeking to take over one of Red Clay's public school buildings. That's a problem because again, the district is under no obligation to give away space, especially when that space could be used to serve the broader Red Clay community. Let's not forget the equity concerns. CSW has historically enrolled few students with disabilities, limited numbers of low-income students, and has consistently failed to reflect the diversity of our district. The bottom line is this. CSW is a charter school that operates independently, yet continues to receive preferential treatment, public subsidies, and physical space at the expense of transparency, fairness, and district students. I'm not here to criticize excellence, but we are here to demand equity. It's time for Red Clay Community to take a hard look at this arrangement, protect its public assets, and ensure that every student in this district has a fair and equal opportunity. Thank you.

Gianna Howard: Hi, my name is Gianna. Last night, I listened to the CSW students share their perspectives at the attendance zone committee about expanding and potentially moving into one of Red Clay’s buildings. Today I want to offer a different point of view. As a student who attends a traditional Red Clay public school, if CSW expands and more students leave Red Clay schools to go there, that means less funding for the schools we actually attend. Our programs, electives, and supportive service services could all get cut because funding follows the student. CSW is selective. Not everyone gets in and many students who need more support or learn differently don't even apply because they know it's not built for them. If CSW expands, it might create even more separation between schools for some kids and schools for the rest of us. CSW is trying to move into one of Red Clay's public school buildings. That space could be used for new district programs, career pathways, or help reduce overcrowding. Losing that building to a charter means fewer options for traditional public schools students like me. It feels like one school is getting all the special treatment, extra funding, nicer facilities, and more opportunities, while the rest of us are being told to settle for less. That's discouraging. We want investment in all public schools, not just one. CSW expanding might make it harder to unite the community around improving education for everyone. Thank you for allowing me to speak tonight.

⏯ 1:01:12 -1:08:31

Vic Leonard: Okay. I just want to say that we had two meetings and again it's a very intense group. We have the public and administration, teachers, etc. And it's very important for this committee to determine new attendance zones and any other school consolidations that we may have or some of the proposals. And at this meeting, we had some public comment from Charter School Wilmington. Mr. Pruitt, this is from the 20th March meeting. Mr. Pruitt reviewed the charge and a committee of the meeting norms. 

Dr. Green offered some insight into possible scenarios from the Redding Consortium and WLC concerning city schools. And this is just a brief overview. Dr. Green also offers some different models from around the country on CTE Innovation Centers and so forth. Since that's one of the scenarios we're talking about in this committee. We had a guest speaker - Ted Ammon Red Clay Chief Operating Officer - presented the very detailed feasibility study for each of scenarios we had 12 scenarios at the time the cost that would be associated with those scenarios, which was very useful to the committee. Then at the end Mr. Pruitt made a motion to have the April town hall meeting be used as a regular meeting so the committee could continue discussion and brainstorming on the many scenarios within the project. And that motion was passed. We had that meeting last night. 

And at that meeting there was a lot of discussion. Again we had several representatives - five I believe and all from Charter School Wilmington comments about the need for a new building. There also was a lengthy discussion for the need for more time to discuss the different scenarios that were brought up through the committee. It was agreed by the committee members to add additional meetings - possibly two per month and extend the deadline for final presentation to the School Board for vote from July to possibly August - September when no later than October 2025 so we can meet the deadlines for choice applications. Ms. Corey Heacock, manager of assessment and professional learning, gave a presentation on the state data concerning the correlation between school size with enrollment and student performance and research showed that the threshold for consistent student learning was around 1,500 but state of Delaware data was not consistent with that and for reasons suggested were demographics and magnet charter schools. 

Mr. Pruitt presented the results of an internal Red Clay CTE audit of all three comprehensive high schools AI High, McKean and Dickinson. The audit showed that Mckean had the most robust programs. They had seven in all CTE programs that were thriving while AI and Dickinson both had one each. And then Mr. Pruitt separated the committee into four groups for discussion and brainstorming. We are now down to 11 scenarios. Because the one was voted down by the committee to combine the AI middle school with AI high school for a 6 through 12 program. 

So it was a great discussion we had and we have a lot of work to do. So we did add another meeting on May 1st which means there'll be two in May and then we will decide then how much more time we need for the presentation to the Board for vote on the four scenarios that were outlined. Next meeting will be May 1st 2025. Thank you. 

Kecia Nesmith: Can I add to that? I just really briefly first I just want to say I am really impressed by the administrative team led by Mr. Pruitt. Okay, Mr. Pruitt with his organization and his leadership around this process - is it's very intricate and well planned. So, thank you for that. And then Dr. Heacock's information about the data in terms of comparing schools was interesting as well. And so lastly, I did mention the need for us to expand our communication around this committee's existence. Possibly a direct email to families in the district so that they are aware ahead of time before any decisions are made because we don't want us to make the recommendation and - I know there's a survey going out but just being very transparent about what we're doing and very uh not just not we're transparent but being very diligent about the communication so that if there's any ideas or concerns that they can come out before we make our recommendation from the committee to the Board. So, I look forward to continuing to do this hard work. It's a very difficult decision, but I know that Red Clay is ready to move forward. Thank you. 

Jose Matthews: Thank you, Dr. Nesmith. Any questions? Moving on. Wilson Learning Collaborative - 

Dorrell Green: Yes. No, I just wanted to clarify for the record that McKean and AI do have more than one CTE program. So I don't - I mean again - I know there's an imbalance and we're working on that imbalance. So I'm not sure, I wasn't present at the meeting. 

Kecia Nesmith: I'll answer that. So that was my other point. I forgot to say the data just a quick correction. It was in terms of the facilities and the the the viability of those programs within the facilities. It wasn't the programs themselves having more. It was more the spaces were more conducive to their programs within McKean. 

Dorrell Green: Right. Okay. So, I just wanted to be clear and I think that's one of the the challenges when we look at CTE programming and and how things are laid out in terms of us being a traditional school district - what it requires when you have CTE programs, what are the capital, minor cap needs to outfit spaces. Too often we wet CTE programs to individual staff members. That staff member leaves and that program goes with them. It takes a lot of investment. So I think part of this committee's efforts are for us to really look at not just from a programmatic need but a facilities need as well. 

I will go on the record to say that based on the direction that the Board provided with us with the charge. Providing or looking for ancillary space for schools outside of Red Clay is not a part of this charge in terms of what we're looking for. I know that media has grabbed this information and has kind of taken it and run with it. We're focused on balancing enrollment, looking at our attendance zones, and looking at programming across Red Clay Consolidated School Districts. I just think that needs to be stated clear for the record.

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee webpage 

April 15, 2025 Meeting Materials 

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Meeting Rolling Slides April 15, 2025

📹Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee April 15, 2025 Meeting Recording

Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee April 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes For convenience, the full meeting minutes are typed below. 

March 20, 2025 Meeting Materials

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Meeting Rolling Slides March 20, 2025

📹Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee March 20, 2025 Meeting Recording

📄Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee March 20, 2025 Meeting Minutes For convenience, the full meeting minutes are typed below. 

March 20, 2025 / 6:00 PM / RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 

Zoom Meeting (For public only. Committee members are in person.) 

Attendance/Welcome Thomas Brucker, Emily Carroll, Dorrell Green, Antonio Gomes, Val Gould, Vic Leonard Sr, Jose Matthews, Caitlin Merto, Jodi Muffley, Kecia Nesmith, Mark Pruitt Jr , Madeleine Reitemeyer, Eric Sanford, Shawn Snyder, Kendra Todd-Dixon, Reggie Worlds 

Vic Leonard made a motion to start the meeting, seconded by Shawn Snyder. Motion passed. Meeting called to order at 6:05pm. 

Agenda Items 

Opening Items 

• Public Comment - Hadrian Cissell, Jenny Howard

• Approve Minutes from February 19th. Jose Matthews made a motion to approve the minutes, seconded by Jodi Muffley. Motion passed. 

New Business 

• The Committee’s Charge/Goal - Mr. Pruitt 

• Meeting Norms - Mr. Pruitt 

• Tentative Timeline - Mr. Pruitt - discussion of changing April meeting to a committee workgroup instead of public town hall 

• Redding Update/Implications - Dr. Green 

• Brainstorming Results - Mr. Pruitt - setting D building removed as possible solution from results, not tied directly to committee charge due to special education considerations 

• Models from Around the Country - Dr. Green and Mr. Pruitt 

• Guest Speaker- Ted Ammann, Chief Operating Officer- discussed the feasibility of brainstormed ideas. 

• Motion made by Mark Pruitt to push back April public town hall and instead schedule April as regular meeting. Seconded by Shawn Snyder. Motion passed. Red Clay Consolidated School District 1 

• Public Comment - Brenda Steffon 

• Adjourn - Caitlin Merto made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Jodi Muffley. Motion passed. Meeting adjourned at 8pm. 

Action Items 

• Moving analysis & discussion, straw poll to next meeting. 

• Additional research on the following models K-8, k-12, 6-8 

Next Meeting April 15, 2025 @6pm at RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 

This meeting is open to the public. The draft meeting minutes will be posted on the district’s website, redclayschools.com, within 3 business days of the meeting.

April 15, 2025 / 6:00 PM / RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 

Zoom Meeting (For public only. Committee members are in person.) 

Attendance/Welcome Jason Bastianelli, Tawanda Bond, Thomas Brucker, Emily Carroll, Amin Farooqui, Antonio Gomes, Val Gould(remote), Vic Leonard Sr, Jose Matthews, Kecia Nesmith, Mark Pruitt Jr , Jennifer Recchiuti, Madeleine Reitemeyer, Eric Sanford, Shawn Snyder, Kendra Todd-Dixon, Reggie Worlds Dr. Corey Heacock - guest speaker 

Mr. Matthews made a motion to begin the meeting, seconded by Mr. Leonard. Motion passed. 6:01pm. 

Agenda Items 

Opening Items 

• Public Comment - Chonnie Blair, Elaine Guo, Arianna Li, Amy Reynoso(Zoom), Kate Terranova 

• Approve Minutes from March 20th. Mr. Matthews made a motion to approve the minutes from March 20th, seconded by Mr. Worlds. Motion passed. 

New Business 

• The Committee’s Charge/Goal - Mr. Pruitt 

• Meeting Norms - Mr. Pruitt 

• Tentative Timeline - Mr. Pruitt - Group discussed timeline of committee, possible adjustments, and goals for board presentation. 

• Mr. Pruitt shared a CTE Audit summary focusing on the facilities readiness of CTE pathways across Red Clay’s 3 A-Z high schools. 

• Dr. Heacock shared limited research on optimal comprehensive high school sizes and grade configurations for K-12 schools. 

• Three groups completed a relevance, feasibility, and impact analysis of ideas presented to date. 

• The committee agreed that Mr. Pruitt will send out a straw poll allowing each Red Clay Consolidated School District 1 committee member to “tally” up to four ideas they support most at this point in the work. This information will be made available at the next meeting. 

• Public Comment - Jason Gleber 

• Mr. Matthews made a motion to add a meeting May 1st, seconded by Mr. Gomez. Motion passed with 9 yes votes and 5 no. 

Adjourn - Mr. Gomez made a motion to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mr. Farooqui. Motion passed. Meeting adjourned at 8:20pm.

Action Items 

• Mr. Pruitt will email a straw poll for committee members' response. 

Next Meeting May 1, 2025@6pm at RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 May 21, 2025 @6pm at RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805

▼Full Transcript Below

1. Public Comment
   ⏯ 5:20 - 10:11:

   1. • Hadrian Cissel (parent): shared comments from the previous meeting on behalf of Jason Gleber (Charter School of Wilmington), who expressed interest in the Charter School of Wilmington potentially expanding into the McKean High School.  Audio was not recorded. 

      • Jenny Howard (parent): raised concerns about whether 6-12 schools were developmentally appropriate; suggested removing middle school from magnet program; cautioned CSW expansion would harm enrollment in district. 

⏯ 1:52:32

1. 1. • Brenda Steffon (Friends of AI): highlighted lack of AIHS PTA and boosters and the need for alumni support in the community. Reiterated timeline for implementation is 26-27, not 27-28.

2. Superintendent's Report on Redding Consortium and its impact on Red Clay & Committee Discussion

     ⏯ 14:15 - 31:35

• Superintendent Dorrell Green provided an update on the Redding Consortium's efforts regarding Wilmington redistricting

3. Brainstorming and Programming Models

⏯ 32:28 - 1:06:15

• Committee Discussion regarding 12 ideas from previous meeting.

4. Presentation on CTE Innovation Campus models from Colorado and Maryland.

⏯ 1:08:08 - 1:23:34 

• Superintendent Dorrell Green discussed his vision for district wide equity and credentialing; explained competition with VoTech. 

• Mark Pruitt and the committee discussed two specific Innovation campus models and ways Red Clay can adapt ideas.

5. Presentation on Finances, Facilities, HR, Transportation

⏯ 1:25:36 - 1:48:19

• Chief Operating Officer, Ted Ammann, provided an impact assessment of the committee's ideas.

⏯ 2:47 Mark Pruitt: We’ve got Dr. Ammann working for us as a doorman; we're set. We are going to get started here. If you don't have - we've got hard copies of minutes, agenda and our brainstorming ideas from last meeting, you're welcome to a copy of those as we move along here. We'll wait just a few more seconds for folks. If you don't have the three documents up front here you can grab those and at this point, if I could have someone on the committee make a motion to bring the meeting to order. Mr. Leonard. Seconded by Shawn Snyder.  All in favor? Unanimous and we are moving along here. 

I’d like to welcome everyone to our third meeting. This is a school board Programming and Attendance Zone Committee meeting.  Our agenda for this evening. I sent this out about - it's been posted for a week. Also sent it to you all vía email a week ago. We'll start with public comment, approve the minutes, review some key documents. That keeps us on target. We will get a Redding update. Some folks had asked about a Redding update and implications. Take a look at our brainstorming results and take a look at some models from around the country. We have a guest speaker here, Chief of Operations, Dr. Ted Ammann, who is here to maybe go through some of the implications of some of our ideas. Also we'll be here to answer questions, some analysis and discussion, take a quick straw poll to see where we stand  hopefully if we have enough time. 

Public comment. You can't give public comment twice, but we will allow anyone who was unable to be here at the beginning to also give it at the end in case they arrived late. So we are up for public comment. Does anyone in person, would they like to give public comment at this time? Hadrian, I know you would - would you like to do it now? 

⏯ 5:08 Hadrian Cissel: Good evening. My name is Hadrian Cissel. Before I start, I just want to make could those on zoom actually hear what I'm saying?

Mark Pruitt: You could certainly step forward if you'd like.

⏯ 5:20 Hadrian Cissel: Okay. I was just making sure I could be heard. Okay, great. I asked to double check because of the last meeting of the attendance zone programming committee on February 19th, the in-person public comment that was given was not broadcast. As a member of the public, who was present in person at the last meeting, I didn't hear that public comment and feel it's important that the wider Red Clay community hear it, so I will quote that public commenter now for the public's benefit.  “Good afternoon, everybody. My name is Jason Gleber. I'm one of the two parent representatives on the Charter School of Wilmington’s board and I'm also the head of our Advancement committee. I'd like to start by thanking the committee here for your time and efforts you're putting into this project. I know this is a labor of love and not an easy task so thank you very much for what you're doing. I would like it to be known that the charter is eager to receive the results of the reasoning as we believe that the outcome will greatly benefit the CSW community and moving forward with our expansion efforts. CSW hopes to be able to take advantage of whatever school building this community needs to be not needed or available, so that we're able to offer our amazing programs that impact more kids in the Red Clay school district at the high school level. Regardless of which school that may be, we are preparing behind the scenes to be in the best position to grow and advance our position within this great community. If we had our choice, McKean would probably be an amazing location for us to expand into and if we were to embrace that decision, we were to make that campus the best possible location for our school. I appreciate all of you for allowing me to speak this evening.” And that was his public comment. Thank you for giving me the time to speak and put that public comment on the record.

Mark Pruitt: Thank you very much. Anyone else in person would like to give? Ms. Howard? 

Jenny Howard: Do I stand?

Mark Pruitt: Whatever you're most comfortable.

⏯ 7:00 Jenny Howard: Okay. So I'm really sorry that I missed the last meeting. I listened to it online. I was definitely ill with the flu. So I had some ideas and I was really sad that I couldn't say them last time. I was so sick. But everyone, just please hear me out on some of the big ideas that I did not hear mentioned. So here we go. My first thought is that 6-12 schools are not developmentally appropriate for either set of grade spans. So the  schedule is not appropriate. Getting up earlier in the morning and then also just personal, as a personal note, I was hesitant too about sending my daughter to a school that had grades 6-12 because my daughter has a summer birthday and she's 11 still. So that would potentially put an 11 year old, who just turned 11, so just fresh 11, in 6th grade with, you know, a 12th grader. So that's just my own personal opinion about why I don't think the 6-12 grade spans are a good idea. The other thing I was thinking is perhaps - I know this is not going to be a popular comment or suggestion but just something to think about. When you have a fourth and fifth grade student and there's these two magnet options that are amazing, it puts a lot of pressure on these kids to figure out what they want to do for like quote unquote “the rest of their life” like if they're going to the science school or animal science or whatever it may be so I'm going to say it again - this is just a thought perhaps we take the sixth through eighth graders out of the magnet programs completely. Maybe condense the two magnet schools together, just making them high schools. So there's that thought too. The other thing that I looked at was I thought of it at a different standpoint too about the capacities of our buildings. So like we have so many seats right now and know we're not doing elementary, but there are seats in some of our buildings like for example like that Warner is only at 58% capacity. I mean, is there room to make a middle school in the city for those kids? Like right now they're going all the way to HB which is so far. So that's other thing I thought of. Like maybe we should be looking at the seats that are open. We're only at 54% capacity and then the last thing i wanted to say, thanks for letting me talk, and this is also going to probably make me a target. I think the public deserves to know that the comment that Hadrian just made from the last meeting which was from CSW, I have no problem with CSW. I have friends who send their kids there. However, we don't owe CSW anything. They actually lived rent free in our building for a while. Sorry I’ll wrap up. 

Mark Pruitt: It’s ok, go ahead. 

⏯ 10:11 Jenny Howard: They lived rent free in our building for a while. We just re-did their locker room. That's their sports, that we now have to pay them for. So I just hope that when we talk about possibly closing a building, we don't just give up one of our buildings to them because also, if they expand, that's going to harm us as well. So thank you for hearing me out. I know it was a lot and I didn't have it written down but thank you.

Mark Pruitt: Okay, anyone else in person would like to give public comment? Anyone anyone on zoom would like to give public comment?

Unknown Speaker: Not this time.

Mark Pruitt: Thank you very much. We’ll move on. Thank you very much. At this point everyone should have, I'm not going to open that link, but we have draft minutes from last month. I sent those out to you just after last month's meeting so if you did not get a chance to take a look at those, look at those now. It's also worth noting that it's not a transcript but we do have the audio and video from our meetings up on the website so we'll wait for a moment or two to let you take a look at those and then I’ll take a motion to accept or amend those meeting minutes. We have a motion to accept from Mr. Matthews. Do we have a second? Ms. Muffley?

Jodi Muffley: I second.

Mark Pruitt: Now take some time here. Does anybody see any changes that we need to make or discussion? Okay everyone in favor of accepting the minutes?

Group: Aye.

Mark Pruitt:  Minutes passed. Unanimous.  

⏯ 11:55 Mark Pruitt: Alright, we’ve seen these next couple of slides a couple of times, but we have our goals for the committee. There they are. We’re not going to read through those, as we’re now in our third meeting. We also have our norms, which we operate. Very important. We have our still the same tentative timeline up there. Okay, but I would mention that we could discuss this at the end, but I do not believe—I think we had a very aggressive goal to be able to have our April meeting be some sort of Town Hall. I do not believe we’re there yet, so I would would—we could discuss that at the end, but I would like to have the April date, if my recommendation was that our April date be another meeting in preparation, possibly for a slotted-in Town Hall time. But we can get to that. And it’s also worth noting that, you know, considerations will need to be given to our timeline at some point here along the process. You know, are we ready to move forward with recommendations to the school board in July, or will we have to make a request for additional time, or add additional meetings, those types of things. We’re not there yet, but, you know, those are things that we could certainly ask the school board—of course, which three members are here with us tonight. Questions about the timeline at this point?

⏯ 13:32 Unknown Speaker: So, you’re going to discuss that with the Board?

Mark Pruitt: We can discuss that. My goal is to discuss that at the end. Yep, the timeline, yeah. And let’s get—let’s see if we get through tonight, and then we can have that discussion. It’s on one of the final slides. Okay, there’s been a—there was a request last meeting. I spoke to Redding a bit. Dr. Green is back with us this evening and is prepared to give us updates and potential implications of decisions for upcoming decisions for the Redding Consortium. Dr. Green?

Dorrell Green: How much time do I have?

[Group laughter] 

Mark Pruitt: Three minutes and 30 seconds. 

⏯ 14:15 Dorrell Green: So, for those that are unfamiliar with Redding, I think maybe just some grounding of the Redding Consortium. So there have been several iterations of what is now known as the Redding Consortium. These were all efforts that have been established at the city to really look at education in the city of Wilmington. It actually started back in early 2000 with the Wilmington Schools Commission, which looked at the implications of the Neighborhood Schools Act, which basically meant that children had to go to school closest to home in the city of Wilmington, specifically those in grades K–8. And each of the districts serving the city of Wilmington—or three - Red Clay Consolidated School District being one, Brandywine School District, and the Christine School District—actually had to submit redistricting plans to the city to basically relocate those students who were traditionally being bused to suburban schools to go to school closest to home. Of the three districts, the Brandywine district [inaudible] segregation order in place. So as it stands now, Brandywine only has Harlan Elementary, which is really their only comprehensive city elementary school, which is actually one of 9 of the Wilmington Learning Collaborative schools, which is another state initiative. Then it went to the Wilmington Education Commission. So, yeah, we actually, which were two state initiatives, basically, to really look at the same thing: how do you look at education within the city of Wilmington?

We actually got to the point where it was a pseudo-agreement between Red Clay and Christina, but it fell apart because the General Assembly didn’t necessarily fund the transition of the capital buildings to have Red Clay take over schools within the Christina school district. The Redding Consortium was then formed by Senator Tizzy Lockman and Representative Nnamdi Chukwuocha to really go back to look at the redistricting of the city of Wilmington.

So, the Carney administration had reauthorized or repurposed what was the Redding, and then Covid happened. And so the redistricting efforts to look at redistricting kind of stalled. Redding went on to support other initiatives, things such as early childhood educator development and supports, a whole host of other things. And now they’ve gotten back to focusing on what they were established to do, which is redistricting.

We just had a most recent meeting, which was Saturday, where we partnered—and I say “we” because I’m a part of the Redding Consortium as a member. Each of the superintendents serving the city of Wilmington, including New Castle County Vo-Tech, are all members of it. Partnered with American Institute for Research. Most often when we look at schools, we look at the conditions of schools. We do what’s called a school needs assessment. As a Consortium member, I personally felt that if any district were to have to reconstitute or take on any additional portion of the city, because the Redding Consortium did vote May 19th of 2024 to remove Christina from the city of Wilmington and begin, basically, an 18-month process to provide an interim plan to the Delaware State Board of Education for their approval. And that plan is written in Delaware Code Title 14, where there are basically 13 stipulations that that plan has to have in place.

And so now the Consortium is in the process of having a series of meetings. There are three subcommittees that have been formed: a financial impact subcommittee, operational impact subcommittee, and a community engagement subcommittee. Each of those subcommittees have various representatives, not only from school districts, but from communities, community partners that serve on there. And there was just a retreat on Saturday where the American Institute for Research, they’re actually conducting a landscape analysis. One of the recommendations that I felt was important, because just moving boundaries and lines won’t fix the problem. I mean, in essence, right now there are 11 governing bodies that oversee 11,000 school-aged children, and it’s actually—there are over 20 governing bodies that govern over 11,000 school-aged children between traditional districts, charters, and vocational technical. So, within the city of Wilmington, physically, there are 11. When you look at school districts and you look at charters, so there are 11 governing bodies within the geographic boundaries of the city of Wilmington.

And so they're now discussing there were 9 options that were elevated for discussion at the retreat that range from - and i'll make sure that you get documentation just to follow up for homework if you want some quiet reading - so look at each of the singleton school districts including Colonial taking on all of the City of Wilmington, whether Red Clay takes on all the City of Wilmington, Christina takes on the City of Wilmington. Excuse me, Brandywine takes all of the City of Wilmington. 

All of those options were removed from the table. And so remaining options are yet to be clearly defined. Metropolitan school district. What does a Northern New Castle County district look like? What does the Wilmington school district look like or what does a combination of two or fewer school districts, whether that's a Red Clay/Colonial combination, a Red Clay/Brandywine or Brandywine/Colonial or you know vice versa to really look at how do you take and recapitalize the Christina portion and look at redistricting. 

Again but the caution is looking at this landscape analysis really looking at the social drivers of health. Not social determinants because there's a difference between a determinant and a driver. Drivers are things that we truly have the ability to change. So when we look at most of the city, it’s segregated based on housing and if you're talking about a neighborhood school, your school is going to look - based on feeder pattern that’s established. So how do you look at equity and balance in that regard. Access to health care, access to programming. 

And so the first phase of the AIR landscape analysis was presented. They basically did community interviews. So they looked at community-based organizations folks who also serve and partner with schools. I want to say that they were maybe 13, and now they're going to move into phase two. But there's also what is known as participatory action research that will actually involve students in this as the researchers to actually help. Because again when we're talking about the lived conditions, who knows best those who are actually experiencing those conditions to help inform the work. 

So that's kind of where Redding sits now. I literally just tried to give you 30 years of history in three minutes and 30 seconds and I may have went over my time a little bit but i will make sure that you get documentation but if it pricked anything in anyone's mind that I can answer right now I'm happy to clarify anything that might be swirling in your mind.

⏯ 22:00 Maddie Reitemeyer: Sorry I tried really hard to follow and I just want to make sure I heard it and then I might have a follow up question. So if I heard it right, Christina not being in the city, and then Colonial, Red Clay and Brandywine absorbing them in some capacity that's off?

Dorrell Green: No because the [inaudible] that's off the table, well that's not off. A single district taking on all the city is off the table, right, and then Red Clay’s part, because then you're really looking at Red Clay going from 15,000 to 20,000 and what we also looked at is the current number of students, who, so for Colonial, for example, of their city’s portion of which is predominantly the east side of Wilmington, there are really only about 260 students within the city that actually currently attend Colonial schools. That doesn't mean that Colonial isn’t their feeder, but they're likely in a charter, right. They're likely at East Side Charter. They're likely attending Thomas Edison Charter, but yet they're in Colonial’s feeder pattern. 

Christina is the only non-contiguous school district, which basically means they have a 16-mile barrier between Newark and the City of Wilmington. So those options for a sole, single school district being Colonial, Red Clay or Brandywine as a singular district taking on the City of Wilmington will remove this option. 

⏯ 23:28 Maddie Reitemeyer:  And whatever the Consortium and we decide for - 

Dorrell Green: Just the Consortium. Just the Redding Consortium. We used to -  what was it was a state-run initiative that were similar to the Redding Consortium.

Unknown Speaker: Okay. Once they put their recommendation out - is the State Board of Ed that certifies it?

Dorrell Green: It's the State Board that approves it and then so in essence what they've changed and that was the difference between WEIC and Redding is that the local boards had to vote on the option. Redding - now it goes to the interim plan to the State Board in the General Assembly.

Unknown Speaker: Thank you.

Dorrell Green: You’re welcome.  

⏯ 24:08 Mark Pruitt: There is no time frame. We're not short of time or we're not over on time. So anyone that has any questions, this is important. 

⏯ 24:16 Kecia Nesmith: Well this is new information to me, so I'm still processing. But, and I said this before - how does that, how might that impact some of the work that we're doing now? For example, now we know acquire the entire Christina School district city portion. Right, we know that. 

Dorrell Green: No. So we may still take on Christina’s portion. Also, when there was a single district taking on the City of Wilmington, that meant that Red Clay's portion of the City of Wilmington could have went to Colonial or Brandywine. So an option could still be for two or fewer yet to be defined, a combination of Red Clay/Brandywine, Colonial/Brandywine, Colonial/Red Clay, would then potentially take on. The challenge with, again, is in essence we're solely just looking at the traditional schools. There's still several governing bodies. So really in essence you're going from 11 to 10. Or potentially 11 to 9 because you're only looking at it through the lens of the traditional school district. When - if you actually look at the percentage of students - and I'll share again some reports with you -  of students who are actually attending charter schools that live and reside in the City of Wilmington - it's a hefty note. 

⏯ 25:47 Kecia Nesmith: Okay. So I think they're talking about a metro mindset?

Dorrell Green: A metropolitan school district that would constitute the city but again, what I pose for the Consortium to think about is how far outside of the City of Wilmington would determine to be that metro school district? While I don't live in the City of Wilmington, well many of us don't, you still have what was designated as a Wilmington address. 

Kecia Nesmith: Address. 

Dorrell Green: Right. Exactly. When you’re talking metro, in terms of balance or tax revenue or all of those various things, when you look at the financial - how far out does that catchment area so to speak actually extend beyond the city?

Kecia Nesmith:  My final comment part is: it's my knowledge there's not really any building, school building, that would be comparable with a high school outside of where Cab/CSW is. Potentially Warner because of what it used to be, but I wouldn't think, that wouldn't be a high school at this point. Are there any other buildings that would have a high school?

Val Gould: PS DuPont. 

Dorrell Green: So PS DuPont used to be a high school.

Kecia Nesmith: PS DuPont, yes. But that's not in our district.

Dorrell Green: It's in the City of Wilmington. 

⏯ 27:02 Kecia Nesmith: Yeah, but I'm just thinking in terms of if we were to acquire Christina, PS DuPont wouldn’t be part of it. 

Dorrell Green:  So you’re saying, so your question is relative to the high school and we could be looking at part of this impetus of why we actually established this committee was the fact that we have under-enrolled high schools. So -

Kecia Nesmith:  I'm talking about in this closer vicinity to the city. But there has been also conversations that we’re busing all the way to Greenville, you know what I mean?

Dorrell Green: Yeah, and typically for a high school, and again, the reason why Christina’s being removed because they're going 16 miles out as opposed to AI or Dickinson being you know or McKean being the furthest distance from the city, but part of that plan is to look at within the Wilmington Learning Collaborative, again which i'm not going to spend another 30 minutes and 30 seconds at this point, stipulation is to [inaudible] within the city. A high school within the city. 

Unknown Speaker: Wonder if it’s going to be Bayard? I had seen it. 

Dorrell Green: The Maurice Pritchett Academy in terms of size, but it wasn’t necessarily designed for a high school, no. There’s a lot of flex space in there. You get a lot of architects [inaudible.] They have a gym that will actually fit in a high school but you talk about fields and those different things. You also have Howard High School which is a high school. There used to be, again, PS used to be but when it was retrofitted it was retrofitted to be more of a middle school so they're you know logistics around hallways, capacity, lockers, different things that get into that, but I don't necessarily - and one of the things that I don't necessarily think that the high school is really a detriment to it as much as it is really looking at the broader numbers and what receiving district and or districts for a reconfiguration plan as a whole. 

Funding is a major mechanism that people would have to consider just in terms of historically through various laws like the city doesn’t really have the ability to generate its own tax revenue. There were things around city wage tax and decisions that were made decades ago that really impacts things. 

Wilmington is actually one of a few, if not the only one in the nation, in terms of they mention a city that doesn't have any governing authority over its education. That was also stripped from the city.

⏯ 29:42 Kecia Nesmith: But they just instituted the Office of Educational Advocacy as of like last week or something, right. 

Dorrell Green: Well it was authorized a month ago that you have to hire anyone, and again that's under the Wilmington city council, which really has that direct authority.

Unknown Speaker: So we are starting phase 2 of the negotiation with research.

Dorrell Green: So American Institute of Research is starting phase 2. Initially what they did was a document analysis, they looked at previous plans, they did structured interviews with key stakeholders, really getting that historical context. One of the things that were flagged in phase 1 for example, were really looking at a lot of community-based organizations, the CBOs and their inability to really coordinate supports and services because of how they're siloed across the city but then also competing for the same level of funds and so whether it's grant in aid or different funding, while they want to partner, they're also competitors. Then that may limit access to constituents, residents within the city, to access certain services because of where they're [inaudible.] So phase 2 of that part is actually starting now and then we had the first retreat.

Unknown Speaker: Is there a timeline on the phase?

⏯ 31:11 Dorrell Green:  So the next phase runs between now and probably about June, which would be the next retreat and that work. But I'll make sure that, through the meeting minutes and updates, get the latest documents from specifically from the Saturday retreat to give you the most up to date.

Unknown Speaker: So the next phase [inaudible.]

⏯ 31:35 Dorrell Green: So the next phase, in terms of once the Consortium narrows down, what they determine is the option, will but I would say, and I've again elevated this - we're already ahead of the game as a district because we're actually doing our due diligence to even analyze our existing footprint where we would be able to actually come and inform the nature of that work by elevating, again, where we may have capacity what levels of funding or additional funding do we actually need to realize any plan in the city puts forward. Yeah that's [inaudible.]

Mark Pruitt:  Any other questions, comments?

Unknown Speakers: Thank you. Thank you very much.

⏯ 32:28 Mark Pruitt: All right so I sent a document to you all which was a summary of our brainstorming ideas. We're going to go through those very quickly now because we're going to spend some time doing an impact analysis in these two groups here tonight. Before I do that there are two things: one we did remove the Setting D. It was like someone threw - and again I was writing anything down on the board okay - but there was a “Add a Setting D at one of our high schools.” For those of you that don't know, a Setting D is created by an IEP team for a special education student who needs that level of support, okay. It's our legal, our legal advice says that a committee like this should stick to programming where students are either attending via their attendance zone where they live or via school choice. No one would attend that school based on either of those factors. Okay so you know a school district, or a school can choose, based on student need and team decisions, to place a student into a more restrictive environment but a committee like this would not be able to open up a D Setting in a school. Okay, so I did remove that since initially I sent out those 12 or 13. The 13 is now 12. Questions about that? Thank you.

Alright, so I'm very quickly going to do this because we're going to spend a lot of time discussing these tonight but hopefully, they are also up here, hopefully get an opportunity to give you a few stickers, take a little straw poll just to take our pulse. These are not votes. This is not final. We're gonna have an opportunity to do some analysis today. We're going to, I'm going to show you a couple of models of the one thing that we don't do. Again, Dr. Ammann is here to talk about operational considerations of these ideas. We're then going to discuss it in some small groups and hopefully if time allows be able to take a straw poll with some stickers next to what we have up here. 

⏯ 34:53 Mark Pruitt: Okay so the first one. Oh I apologize. The first one, is I do believe that when we make these recommendations to the Board, that we should move forward with these. Is there in many ways in the goals that the Board charged us with and so we absolutely should turn around and say that we should align high school boundaries with middle school boundaries which we know we do not do right now. So wherever we land from a programming standpoint, the boundaries, when possible, should align so we have some vertical articulation where students attend. Okay? So we're not going to decide where we stand on that because I believe that that should be, you know, core in our recommendation. Any questions, concerns, comments about that for discussion? Okay.

⏯ 35:48 Mark Pruitt:  The second one is wherever we land, you know, it makes sense that any change should then a consideration being given within that boundary-driven decision to distribute students equally to our high schools. We also saw that Dickinson and McKean have an opportunity in their attendance zone for nearly twice as many students as AI.  So if we landed at three schools, if we landed at two. They should be divided somewhat equally. That's never going to be perfect. That was the second one that came up. I think that's sort of a driving pillar that we can move forward with, without making decisions. They're not program-specific here. Program change is specific. Questions about number two? Comments, discussion?

The final one was about a commitment to graduates and there should be equity of programs you know across all of our schools. Certainly I’d anticipate that we'll still have a magnet school for performing arts and a magnet school - but core programming. There’s a certain core programming of college readiness, career readiness that all of our students should have access to. And I think that that should be sort of a driving, you know, message that we give to the School Board. 

So, you know, when I sent this out a few days afterwards I pulled those. Any discussions,  questions, comments about that? Dr. Nesmith?

⏯ 37:31 Kecia Nesmith:  How do we ensure - and this may be a thought question, not necessarily you wanted to answer right now - but how do we ensure equity in programs when we have the competition for the magnet and/or the Charter Schools of Wilmington types? Like even like how we have the Dickinson has the IB program and McKean has kind of their CTE program, you know. So each school kind of right now has some sort of difference positively, but how do we control for equity in that?

⏯ 38:14 Mark Pruitt: I'll take a shot. Our current strategic plan, which we're in the middle of year one a 5-year plan and I can say that part of our plan is to create a commitment to high school students in our school district, okay, where we have equitable college and career opportunities. Everyone will have a - every student will have an opportunity to get a Capstone type college-ready program. Not the same one. But at Conrad a student could be an AP Capstone diploma student through the college board where they take two research type courses, four other AP courses and they get a Capstone diploma at graduation. As we currently exist, AI and McKean would have a college sophomore distinction diploma through the Early - through the partnership with Goldey-Beacom. Dickinson would have students sit for the IB diploma.  That's where we currently exist in creating equity, but not necessarily the same. It's just one example of a difference between equal programming and equitable programming.

Also within that commitment we are looking to create a core set of AP courses and a core set of dual enrollment courses that all of our high school students have access to. I think a change, you know, while yes these, somebody's always going to have environmental or calc 3 or some one off that makes them unique, we offer these core set of courses for dual enrollment and for AP at any of our schools. On the college and career side, we're looking to as we currently sit have a Core 4 as we work through the plan of CTE programming. Certainly schools may have something unique, that makes them unique, we are, you know, whether we like it or not, we are a choice - newcastle county it's a choice area - and so you know I think, you know, we need to make a decision. So I think while they can't be, you know, it won't be the same. I think we can create some standards and that's the plan that we're doing a lot of work there with our team here in Red Clay and our principles, two of which are here tonight. Dr. Green?

Unknown Speaker: Jodi has a question.

⏯ 40:47 Jodi Muffley: I'm gonna say something and it may not be the…It's the elephant in the room. It is my truth.  This is great and it's a lot of words, but no one's addressing the elephant in the room. Why kids, why parents are not sending their kids to AI High school.  And I feel like we're saying, “We're gonna do this and we're gonna do this,” but we're not addressing - you can put all those programs and I know I've talked to Dr. Green about it. My program's amazing.  Amazing. But, it's not going - people are not putting their children in that school and that's what I feel. Like we're shuffling. We're playing whack-a-mole and we're doing everything and we're not - like all of this programming. I mean, you know, Mark, I love it there. I believe in it and I just feel like all of this - they're just not sending their kids there and we don't address that.  I think putting these programs everywhere, yes, but I had said to Dr. Green, “Put my program at Dickinson. Guess what? They'll all go to Dickinson.” They're not putting their children in this building and I feel like we're talking around it, but why? Like have we gotten to that?

Kecia Nesmith:  Yes. I said it the first meeting.

Jodi Muffley: I didn’t want to go there, but thank you. That's why I didn't want to bring up my comment, but that's the truth. 

⏯ 42:15 Kecia Nesmith: So here's the thing right now. We're not going to change that. So I think what Dr. Pruitt is talking about is how do we make - we're also looking at the boundary. So maybe we shift to the right, to the left, to have more racial and cultural equity. Just shifting a little here, shifting over there for all of the schools. People aren't gonna like that no matter. Somebody's going to have a problem whatever we decide. And if people are not want their kids in certain, around certain demographics they're not going to want their kids - Delaware is one of the highest states of students in private school in the United States of America. So we have some historical issues from the start that I don't know that we can come back, but I do believe that we do name the elephant every time but we keep on moving forward.

Jodi Muffley: Thank you. That's what I wanted.

Unknown Speaker: So I think that at some point [inaudible] as it relates to Al right and so now we're back at the wheels with navigation and within any program whether, it doesn't matter how great it is, it takes time. We know that it takes longer than a year. It takes two. To have programming, to have it be branded out, to rebuild. That's going to take three or five years. 

⏯ 43:45 Jodi Muffley: I guess my fear is that -

Unknown Speaker: So we've got to pour into that branding. To say, “We are rebranded.”  Because we are. So the patience has to exist with the proper program. 

Jodi Muffley: Yeah I guess I just am fearful and I have a child aging out and no other ones. I just fear that we are going to segregate when we keep talking about boundaries and moving kids. I am an AI feeder pattern in my house but I feel like we're, you know what I mean, we're going back to black and brown schools, white schools, that we're doing with neighborhood schools.

Kecia Nesmith: But we do segregate by choice.

Jodi Muffley: So, yeah.

⏯ 44:24 Kecia Nesmith: That's not anything we can control. So let's work it within our focus of control. Our focus of control is that we can provide the best programs at every school for any student. Maybe look at some of the boundaries in terms of, for example, some areas have aged-out homeowners, like my community. So now we get we're having a lot more young families coming in. That's going to change the numbers of school students when going to Linden Hill, where Linden Hill is going to be - it's already probably at capacity or close to it - if you take my neighborhood alone you're adding hundreds and hundreds of elementary school children. So when Dr. Green talks about the landscape analysis, that is important to understand where people are living now and what are the age groups of kids for the next 10-20 years. So to your point, there's no way to get away from segregation because of how Delaware's laws are made.  And if you go into another state, like where I work, you're going to have segregation by economic stability.  So segregation is something that I think that we're aware of but I also think and I'll say this again, Red Clay does an excellent job of trying to make things equitable, more so than any other school district I've ever worked in. I’ve worked in two states and lived in another one. So I hear you and I think we should keep that at the forefront because it is a thing. It is a thing and if we don't talk about that thing, that thing will never change. So I think we have some good plans in place and some ideas to put plans in place. I know that we're going to present to us, the Board, I don't know how we're going to get there, if I do, but I'm going to trust the process.

⏯ 46:14 Mark Pruitt: We'll discuss that at the end.  Other folks who would like this great conversation? Maddie?

⏯ 46:21 Maddie Reitemeyer: Something I just I want to say and l think I'm one of the ones who put up, you know, just redistrict and [inaudible], keeping three high schools, you know, all at 700. I'm just throwing a random number out rather than having 9, 9, and 5 but I grew up in the city in the 80s and the 90s. So I had, there was three of us. I talked about this a lot. My sister's two years older, my brother's two years younger. We were bused out 40 minutes and even despite my sister being two years older, my brother being two years younger, we went to different schools because, really, they were trying to keep families guessing where we’re redistricting, where we’re redistricting? So my sister's Red Clay experience looked nothing like mine. She went to a different elementary and then a different middle because they kept moving us and we just kept being redistricted. My sister was the one, who the judge made the order in I think April of her eighth grade year, to shut Wilmington High down. So she was in April of her eighth grade year and didn't know what high school she would go to.  To say all this, I'm worried about us redistricting only for Redding to come in and those families get moved one more time,  two years later. I did not like it as a kid. I feel like it affected my family and our community. I also did not like being on a bus for 40 minutes every day. I remember getting on the bus in the dark and coming home in the dark. So I do want us to think about the families if we move them once and then again just a few years later. We should definitely hear from the families that are in the city. My family doesn't live in the city anymore. But I just feel like we're not thinking about that if we just quickly put a redistricting plan together and then do it again because of what Redding Consortium decides.  So I want us to be careful while we're thinking about that.

⏯ 48:34 Dorrell Green: Just to know that one of the stipulations within redistricting for Redding is minimally disruptive. Basically means that families can still choose that they want to stay within their school and their grade band then they will have that ability to do so. Which again further complicates what that would mean right, because if things change then I'm currently in the Christina school district but I want to stay, although Brandywine is going to become my new district, but if I want to stay within that school, they have the option to stay until they get through that grade band. So if I'm in elementary and I'm a kindergartner when that transition happens I will have the ability to stay within that school. And what I can't caution that, I think you're bringing up a very valid point. People don't realize it requires what we're doing now, other districts are going to have to do that, and then some because it's like now you're, you have to account for the students who are zoned to you but then stay where they want because it's minimally disruptive. Families have that option but then programs for those who might be coming to Dr. Nesmith’s point, if you're not really looking at the landscape of where there is growth you may have a building that is under-enrolled in a five-year period of time when things are coming. So I think all valid points. One of the things that, again, and my advocacy in sitting at these tables is that we have a request to have some big data model. I think at this stage of Al and we have the star campus, all of this research stuff at the University of Delaware, I know we're working with John Laznik but to really employ some people to do some really broad data modeling not just for the current numbers and to really look at everything from birth rate where we're experiencing growth in New Castle County I think it would be remiss for us not to acknowledge and keep bringing up that growth is happening in the middle and southern part of our state. Appo is on the verge of building a support high school so there's a lot of mobility in Delaware. Folks generally live in Middletown but go to school at Concord high School because of you know maybe proximity where my parent works. People would be surprised about the amount of mobility. So, all valid points. So, again just keep adding that to the discourse so that we can capture that and as is it in both spaces know that this voice gets elevated in that space and I get it. I think we're ahead of it because we as a district are really taking that bonus of really analyzing our own current situation and it really helps inform I think some of the blind spots that are outside of this room, outside of our district. People are just thinking that redrawing the lines is going to be the change that we all see which we know is not the case. 

⏯ 51:32 Unknown Speaker: Just as a parent's perspective, specifically to your point about, I don't know what program it is that you were talking about today - AI? I don’t know if I learned that. But my daughters, when they approach high school age, I live literally across the street from [inaudible] so i know that that is an option for them. I drive past Conrad on my way to work so that's going to be an option. Choice is great for the people that are able to take advantage of transportation. If your program is perfect for them, it's still going to be a struggle for them to get there. 

Jodi Muffley: Yeah that's part of our -

Unknown Speaker: I remember that was brought up so I just want to mention it.

Jodi Muffley: Yes. I agree with that.

Unknown Speaker: It’s only as good as the people who are able to make it. 

⏯ 52:27 Mark Pruitt: Anyone else before we move on? Okay. Alright, so very quickly. You've had this,  you know, we talked about a technical high school / Innovation Center, all right, at one of our high schools. This resulted in two attendance zone high schools that used that third high school space. 

Second one was making that Innovation Center available to middle school students also. 

The third was moving The John Dickinson middle school program to Skyline to allow for increased high school enrollment at the two attendance zone schools, right. A little misleading I  would say this, there's a better example of Al High's low enrollment than AI and it was Dickinson in 2011. They were dangerously low. They ran a year with under 500 students, right, and they committed to IB and now they've got I think, a little misleading though, people think that building's full. It is full, but it's got 300 middle school kids in there. At 780 it’s not enough. It's not enough high school kids to be a comprehensive program, in my opinion, so I'm talking as a committee member. But moving those students out. 

There was a motion for an online school of some sort online programming, 6-12, to meet the needs of those students. 

There was a motion to move the Charter School of Wilmington to an existing high school to allow for potential additions of Redding students at the Wilmington campus. 

There was an expansion of the, this was leaning in as I remember it, you know, expand Dickinson as a 6-12 IB magnet program, and again go to two attendance zone high schools McKean and AI. I've got the ideas up here kind of spell that out a little more. 

I think generally, this is probably the biggest,  the least flushed out, but the consolidation of middle school programs from 8 to 7, right. We had gone from 5 middle school programs to 8, of which enrollment is low in multiple schools, but somehow condensing that from 8 to 7 schools.

A Warner-Shortlidge. The north side of Wilmington. We've got a relatively small geographic area with students up there that do a lot of traveling. Warner Shortlidge community school K-8, which might include a Support Center with services. Another idea connected to that is a K-12 program at Warner.

Shawn Snyder: Val has a question.

⏯ 55:22 Val Gould: It’s not so much a question. It’s more of a statement. Thank you, Shawn. As much as 6-12 is developmentally inappropriate, I've worked at a number of K-8 schools,  including Brandywine Springs. And the stuff those kindergartners hear those 7th and 8th graders say on the buses is atrocious. And that is also I don't think developmentally appropriate either. So just throwing that out there. I know we have K-8 schools in the district already. Well, sorry - one. [group conversation] So I'm just saying, you know, I think we need to be conscious of developmentally appropriate, possibly.

Mark Pruitt: We're going to have an opportunity to speak to that, discuss that, digest that amongst each other here. I'm going through these very quickly so that we can dig into these ideas. 

⏯ 56:33 Kecia Nesmith: I caution us about our opinions. Because people are saying things that are not true. They're opinions. Like, “Oh the research.” What does the research say? About K-8? 6-12? 6-8? 9-12? There's more current research out there and no model is one perfect. There's always going to be some drawbacks but what are the - if you could outweigh - if the positives can outweigh the negative then we need to look into that. You also need to look into the demographics of those models. They don’t fit the same for suburban versus urban. So I think that when we are bringing up our ideas, we should come prepared having at least done a little bit of research around what we think. 

⏯ 57:20 Dorrell Green: I would even elevate to begin the discourse that if there are things that get elevated in the conversation that need more research, we can do that fact-finding too between meetings to share [inaudible] to be able to give people adequate information again on what is a -  because we do, sometimes, we'll bring our own biases either through our own experiences, because I was at Redding and I told people, like, I don't recall ever having a white educator until I got to high school and that was Stan The Man Kowalski, who was my high school math teacher and he chose to wear Sonoco overalls to school every day, but I learned pre-calculus and calculus in his class as a student who never saw my place in those higher level advanced types courses and so when we sometimes we, again, and I think there has been, in my experience, in 25 plus years of being in education, working started out in Christina, being an administrator of Brandywine, working at the state and now leading Red Clay, that so much of what is experienced and decisions that are made are based on people’s personal experiences without actually putting research in to say what are some of the proven models across the nation? Because there are people who are doing innovative things. My niece graduated high school with an associate's degree and all of her high school experience was on Prince George's County Community College. She never was required to play a sport. She didn't have gym. They didn't have a prom but that was the right program for my niece. She got her Bachelor’s in 18 months from the University of Maryland Baltimore County and she just earned her master's from the University of Chicago online program and she's 21. My sister's a single mom so there are people who are doing things. I think sometimes we just gotta allow ourselves to really think outside of our personal boxes and I think the historical kind of context that's been Delaware and really allow ourselves to think about what is best for students. So one of the things that we did with even with our strategic plan, we did a labor market analysis because it’s wonderful to say we’re offering all these CTE programs, but I’m graduating high school with a diploma and a CTE program, with no certification and no clear path of a college that either is going to propel me that I can go straight into the workforce, we've told students a lie. Work hard and your dreams will come true when in actuality you worked hard and you ended up to the road to nowhere. And that’s one of the reasons why we actually need to be creative and think through this process so that when we talk about our portrait of a graduate, we're graduating students who are ready to go and are marketable and we're intentional about what we're setting them up whether they want to stay within the region or they want to move away. So I think every point that's being made, they’re all valid points and so if there are things that, again, are part of the conversation that the committee decides that they need more research between meetings, we will commit ourselves to making sure that we provide that research so that, again, it’s just, there is a level of being quote-unquote fact-based or research-based so we can wrestle with those ideas and also have the research component. And then maybe even have some places to go to look at proven models where it may actually be working for us I think being possible.

⏯ 1:01:03 Val Gould:  Oh and so, Kecia, to your point, I don't know what the research is.

Kecia Nesmith:  I'm sorry, I didn’t mean, I was coming to get you. 

Val Gould: No, it’s fine. I didn’t take it personally. I just want to be clear that I worked in a 6-12 school. It’s a private school, and saw a lot of inappropriate interactions between 6th and 12th graders. I worked at a school in DC that was K-8, saw a lot of inappropriate stuff there. I worked at Brandywine Springs. I mean, there’s always inappropriate stuff, right?  Like, it's kids. I get it. But like also there's stuff that 14 year olds do that 5-year olds probably shouldn't be exposed to and I mean, that's just my opinion. 

Kecia Nesmith: Yeah and I don't even -

Val Gould: And that's why I said “I don't think.” I wasn't trying to present and -

Kecia Nesmith: I wasn't trying to - I'm sorry it came out that way. I was just thinking, because I’m researching while we’re talking because I don’t know the answers and so I started to look up some research while we’re talking and I thought one thing, and the research was saying something different. So that’s why I brought it up. We’re taking personal professional research-based all of the above. Like lived experiences, it is research, right. That's phenomenology, so that is important that all the experiences the people who are from Delaware, the ones who weren't from Delaware, the ones who went to school here, the ones who didn't and we're never gonna go with the perfect thing but I do think that we need to hear these things and I think our timeline's pretty tight, Dr. Green [inaudible] look at models but as schools at least [inaudible] and again, we’re urban, suburban, mid, those all matter and economics all that impact how a school functions so I don't think it's a one [inaudible.] That was nothing. 

⏯ 1:03:13 Antonio Gomes:  Just a quick question. Honestly, thank you for your comments. I'm starting to wonder are we - we're going down this path and discussing different amounts of ideas. To your point, they're clearly ideas that other I guess districts, other states, whatever, are doing today and have we looked at potential places where there is some success stories because that sounds amazing by the way, and why like instead of reinventing the wheel look at that kind of fall similar parameters than us and see if that is the possibility that we can incorporate something similar here as well. I'm just throwing that out there and I apologize.

I just, to me, it's like “Oh this is terribly inefficient. If there's something that we know is gonna work, why not just do it?  So I don't know if we looked at that data outside of Delaware and it's great to get all this data research because I think that plays a part in it, but now once we know those data parameters let's look at those success stories where there's proven results and seeing do those parameters match. And if so can we procreate it here? I am sorry if that's not - 

[inaudible group conversation]

⏯ 1:04:41 Unknown Speaker: On number one, I don't know - you didn't highlight this, but Early Graduation and Innovation Center was one of the ideas was [inaudible]. Not keeping kids longer than we need to be [inaudible]. So that was an idea that was thrown out there.  

⏯ 1:04:54 Mark Pruitt: We’ve done some things. I think that, don’t let our timeline, or don’t let the condensed timeline, we can always ask for more time. We actually have, we wouldn't make any changes like this until September of 2027 at the earliest. That's as early as possible to even start any changes like that. The Board charged us with July of this year but I do think that we've got a great committee, we've got great people from representing different groups and if we decided, “Hey, you know what, we need to look at this a little bit further.” We're also not moving forward, we're just coming up, we're trying to flush out some ideas. I think it's one thing to throw an idea up there, then you kind of say you bring in someone like Dr. Ammann, you take a look at some questions about is it possible, is it feasible, is it high leverage in our opinion then you go out, you go let's look at some models, let's look at the research and you're going to see a little bit of that tonight. 

Reggie Worlds: What are your last two ideas, Mark?

[laughter]

Mark Pruitt: The last two ideas are capping Conrad and Cab at smaller - none of these are my ideas - 

Reggie Worlds: It seemed like we got a little stuck. 

⏯ 1:06:15 Mark Pruitt: We’re on tape here. Capping Conrad and Cab at smaller enrollments. Conrad has a 680-student high school.   So make that a little smaller. Middle school's at 490 or 500. Make that a little bit smaller and the same or similar situation with Cab. 

And then finally would be choice busing for all. Also the term “equitable choice bussing” for all to all of our, I think, for all of our students to all of our schools something like that. That's a very broad idea but then that was where we were when we brainstormed for the first time. Okay? Alright. 

Speaking about models from around the country, there are two that we've had some connection with. The first one is, I may let Dr. Green speak to quickly about his experience and then I'll show you a couple of things that they do there. Second one is much closer to us, Cecil County. Their School of Technology. I've spoken multiple times with their superintendent and the administrator at the school. To me, that’s the idea up here that’s come out so far. That is, we don’t do that at all. Like and that is something that might work and it might work for us. I think you're going to find, I think, you know, I think you're going to find data positive negative K-8, same with 6-12. I think all that is going to be who does the search last for the data, but this is something that I think we need to do some more homework on. So I'll let Dr. Green go. We'll go 3 minutes 45 seconds this time. 

⏯ 1:08:08 Dorrell Green: I'm doing it in 2 minutes and 30.  So, coming in, actually tomorrow will be my six year anniversary, my first official day when I started. And one of the things that you notice, in general, that I noticed, was that there are inequities throughout our district. And so a lot of the conversation, “How do you actually program to address inequity?” It's extremely hard and difficult to do as was just stated. Parents who can access choices and have the ability, will access those choices. And then you default to situations where families who don’t - can’t. And won’t. So they are relegated to their feeder option and AI is symptomatic of that. Because AI is now - and it's not just not here - it's in Brandywine for the most part, although Brandywine kept their deseg order, primarily Christina. Where you default, so you have suburban urban high schools because you have city students with feeder patterns or high schools outside and those families who have the ability to make the choice. So how do you plan for that? And again, going and seeing seniors graduate across the stage and always wondering if we are actually preparing them for the world that we claim we're preparing them after they just spent 13 years with us, they're leaving with a high school diploma, they spent time in a CTE pathway and they're not leaving with something as simple as - what we started to promote was the Seal of Multiliteracy. That’s the high school students graduating with a credential. They can make themselves marketable because they’re bilingual. Or looking at someone that has Cisco certification. That I can make myself marketable. But how do we program for equitability or  looking at providing and having anchor pathways situated. So let’s say I want a Safe Serve certification but I’m in a dance major academy. How can I - and I love cooking - how can I have access to programming? And so, an Innovation Center really gives us the opportunity to anchor ourselves as a district to have anchor pathways that everybody in the district can - and then Conrad can be Conrad. IB can be IB. So then when families know, and I’ll just use again, and I know we’re not supposed to bring our own situations into it, but when you select a program and you say it’s a choice, you made that choice. And sometimes you have to live with that choice. To a degree, I think what we, what’s happened in Red Clay is a simple or the broader microcosm of Delaware is we want our schools to be all things to all people, even through a choice process. So then, when you say you’re unique, you can only be unique to a certain extent because now, everybody should have, whereas what do we know through a labor market analysis, a study, what do we know through CTE programs and then as a comprehensive school district because the other elephant in their lives, or a herd of them in the room sometimes, we cannot compete with the vocational technical high schools, just from a funding standpoint. My wife works at Hodgsen’s VoTech. They’re gonna get a brand new, state-of-the-art school that they did not have to go to referendum to get and they can offer programs in a fashion that we can’t. And I’m not disparaging them, but if you want to be a plumber and you live in Red Clay, guess where I want you to go? I want you to go to DelCastle. Because when I call someone to fix my pipes, I want you to be a master plumber. I don’t want the kid, who came through, who just learned how to solder a pipe because he had a pseudo-CTE program and it made it sound good so that we can keep enrollment up, and that’s kind of the business, so from my perspective, that’s when we start to really look at something like what does the whole and then we look at our Adult Ed program because we're 1 of 6 adult Groves Adult Education sites, then you could actually anchor that in one location so that students, families, community as a whole can actually benefit from it. It becomes more than just a place where children go, but it actually can be part of a community hub.  But, you know as I started to look at models - early on when I came to Red Clay - but I dealt with it when I was in Brandywine as an assistant superintendent, we can either build a brand new Claymouth elementary school for 28 million or we can renovate it from 32. Guess what the decision was? To renovate it for 32. Because sometimes nostalgia and tradition and familiarity helps the adults in the room because we feel good about it. No one wants their schools - we're not talking about closing schools - we're talking about reimagining Red Clay and the beauty of it is, and if you haven't noticed, we don't refer to it as Red Clay School District. If you see our branding, it's Red Clay Consolidated School District for a reason because whether you're at Conrad, whether you're at McKean, whether you're at AI, whether you're at Linden Hill,  whether you're at Warner, whether you're at Shortlidge or William C. Lewis, but you see that, that should represent the comprehensive nature of who we are as a community and once we get to high school, and Mark, I know I’m probably at 4 minutes and 30 seconds because you put me on my soapbox. This is just a model or an example that would benefit everybody and so you don’t have winners and losers. We just have to be intentional about how we drive and give people access to those pathways and our traditional high schools can be stable, but we can really look at how do we align our middle school feeder patterns so that our comprehensive high schools have that balance that we deny. But that's one of, again, many examples that are throughout. 

⏯ 1:14:14 Mark Pruitt: Cherry Creek is in Colorado. I'm not going to - I could, we could go through this for the rest of the time, but you, this link is on our website right now. I'm going to send you these slides. Go to it, take a look, but this is their main page. These are the three-year pathways that they offer for students from 6 different high schools. Shuttle buses, okay. Getting students, they spend a half a day. They're on an A/B block schedule, it's a lot of detail that we're not anywhere near that yet, but they've got 6 schools that run on the same A/B block schedule throughout the year. Shuttle buses getting these students to these programs and there are the pathways but they also have early college coursework. So on and so forth. They also have a great FAQ on the website. I will open that up. What is the Cherry Creek Innovation Campus?   It's a standalone college and career preparedness facility. Gives you their umbrella pathways and then there's pathways within each of those umbrellas. It's a high school, yes, but it's not a comprehensive high school. It's a program where students attend from their other high schools. Is there an application process, yes. I will say this about both these programs I’m showing you. They’re both applications and there are the pathways.  i'm showing you they're both applications and there is not enough space for everyone. So they are somewhat competitive. Okay, I do not, Mark Pruitt, the member of this committee, does not subscribe to that and I do believe that we need to shuttle any student - do I think there's gonna be, there could be some students at our schools that may choose not to participate, but I think we need to have enough seats and that it'd be a part of their regular programming so that's what I believe. Okay so I will say these are great programs. But they’re a little a la carte choice, a little competition. A little disappointment in spring of your 10th grade year -

⏯ 1:16:26 Dorrell Green: But to Antonio’s point though, right, though, that's the adopt, adapt not adopt model, right. 

⏯ 1:16:34 Mark Pruitt: Right. Yeah so the program is great but they're trying to do it for a larger school district, with a, in a smaller building. I think we've got an opportunity here. Go to Cecil County. All right so Cecil County. Obviously most of us are familiar with Cecil County. It's actually the closest school building to Red Clay. If you're familiar with the University of Delaware you go out at what I still call I don't call it South Main Street, I call it Elkton Road,  you start down Elkton Road, you go about a quarter mile into Maryland, you make a right on I believe Appleton Road, go back about a mile. They bought a building about 12 years ago, re-outfitted as a School of Technology, very similarly, you know, turned it into various pathways. Now what they do is students apply midway through their junior - their sophomore year, and they get 3 credits and a pathway. And again, I think we need to be able to use some of these ideas now, yes, without a presentation. So I’ll let you take a look at it on your own here over the next month. But their model is restrictive in that the schools are so far away, that you got a school taking a 20 it's a 25 minute shuttle ride, so what they do is an A day in your home school, a B day you're there for 1 period and then you gotta go for 3 periods because you've got a half an hour bus ride then you're at the school but you gotta leave 40 minutes before the end of the day so that you can either catch a regular bus home or go to field hockey practice, stay after school for your club, whatever the case may be. We would have a little more flexibility with the proximity of our high schools to be able to offer probably more flexible programming than that. 

⏯1:18:38 Shawn Snyder: Okay just to get back on this, Mark, a shuttle bus system for students in Delaware exists - in Sussex County. My son participates in it. He goes to DelTech and takes college courses as an eighth grader. They call it Academic Challenge; it's been down there since the 70s. All those students ride a bus you know, 20-30 minutes from the DelTech campus to whatever high school they go to in Sussex County. It’s kind of the reverse idea of this. It works great. It’s been great for my kid. It gives him, I mean, he’ll have calculus as a sophomore, differential equations, you know, finances. I never took, which for him is great but it's very doable. I think as Delawareans we’re like, “Oh my god, 15 minutes on a bus!” which is like the rest of earth. It is a 15-minute bus ride. Like, it's a Delaware thing. And I rode like an hour to school on a bus in Pennsylvania because that's how Pennsylvania is. In the middle of it is 8 people and a whole bunch of space.

⏯ 1:19:32 Caitlin Merto: Yeah and I was just gonna say that the transportation piece like that was gonna be my question was kind of how they handle that because we do like in my district in Pennsylvania we have some CTE programs in our high school that's what I teach and then we also send them out to Delaware DCTS which is if we don't offer your program in district they have to go and I went and observed there one day and it was just like insane to watch the kids kind of roll in and then have a -

Mark Pruitt: Let me pause you there for a second. I had you down as absent, so join either one. Somewhere you have a seat. It’s not a big deal. 

Unknown Speaker: Sorry to interrupt. 

Mark Pruitt: Go ahead, I apologize. 

⏯1:20:09 Caitlin Merto: DCTS because I teach in Pennyslvania and then I was like this one small portion of time and then need to watch the kids roll out because they’re all from different setting school districts is one piece, the other piece is if we’re going to explore any of these models would be that we would need to also have a discussion about what we do with students whether that's at the middle school level or at the high school level to make sure that they have opportunities to explore what their options are and that way they can make informed decisions because I think, you know, otherwise we're just saying to kid oh yeah I like cooking but they've never had an opportunity to engage with it and then they're making a choice but that might push them into a different pathway and then it might be more disruptive to them when they realize that they're actually more interested in a teacher's academy. You know what I mean? Like or some other kind of pathway and that's something I feel like my district could really improve upon where I teach and so I just think it's important if we're going to have like a more like a pathway approach to work.

⏯ 1:21:13 Dorrell Green: And we’re actually investigating that now with a middle grade’s grant  because I’m thinking is that you have to start a little sooner with pathways, just, not that you’re locked in, but that you have an idea that four years of high school goes by fast. And most students think, “Oh, I got my freshman year to get it right.” and your freshman year 

actually is your most important year and so if you're going to get in the pathway and you're looking at exploratory. Then by the time, I'm spending my junior and, having a senior right now is in a pathway but as of March 20th 2025 is getting ready to check out. She's probably starting to check out mentally, yeah but she's engaged, she's ready to go to college. But her pathway worked and now she knows what she wants to be, but for every student that's not the case. So we have two grants that we're working so AI Middle and Stanton are those two schools that have that grant so that we look at middle grades expansion or CTE Exploratory.  

⏯ 1:22:11 Unknown Speaker: Going off of like that, and then what you said, I went to, I grew up in PA, went to Avon Grove School District, and we had the TCHS,  and that was pretty [inaudible] because I had my brother's two years older so he went, started I think his sophomore on junior year - carpentry. Didn’t [inaudible] he’s working for PACA now; he's a welder. So he figured out carpentry like wasn't for him but he's still very happy he did it because it shows him it taught him skills that like he wouldn't have learned at Avon Grove and told him like oh I don't want to do this and similarly, I did the Allied Health program there my senior year. I'm clearly not working in the health field but it showed me, I learned a lot of valuable stuff there, but it showed me I didn't want to do that. So I think like going down the wrong pathway isn't the worst thing in the world regardless - 

[inaudible group conversation]

Dorrell Green: And those are transferrable skills. And to bring it full circle to what we are looking to do in equity of programming. Advanced Placement and making sure, you know, like AP Seminar, and one of the courses that we’re gonna, every sophomore in Red Clay regardless of where you could [inaudible] because it’s transferrable skills. We know that, again, if he didn't have carpentry and now he's welding he probably wouldn't have the ability to kind of navigate and work with [inaudible].

⏯ 1:23:34 Mark Pruitt: We are grappling with that issue now of getting into a pathway without enough information, making decisions. We have a couple of schools that start the three-year path in 9th grade and a couple that started in 10th grade. I do believe that we have to, and our strategic plan addresses this, I will to tell you this, but we are going to move on, but Ms. Todd-Dixon has started a program at Conrad where they do the pathway in 10, 11 and 12, and they offer like these 6-week sequences so you get a taste of them all and can make a more informed choice. We'd like to build that out district-wide over the next five years and whether it includes something like this or not. Okay. All right. So I do believe we've got a firm remainder of our agenda because it's 7:23 and I am going to let Ted, did Ted leave? Ted probably got tired of waiting. So I'm going to bring Dr. Ammann up. He is our chief operating officer in the school district. He can introduce himself and his role a little further. What he did was take a look at - we are eventually going to get to 3 questions when we, that makes, to have some discussions next Relevance to the problem, right. Does this idea - is it relevant? Does it solve our problem potentially? Feasibility. He's going to talk a little bit about feasibility right now. If the price tag is unreasonable, if the human resources are not possible, if our buildings are not outfitted in such, you know, well which building, where might it be, those kinds of things, okay. And then the last one which we'll get to next month is the impact. Is this idea high leverage?  You know it will make a difference towards a problem and for our kids? So at this point, we will advance one slide and Ted, if you want to kind of go through some of the ideas and then we'll ask you some questions. 

⏯ 1:25:36 Ted Ammann: Yeah, when I walked in, Mark told me I could sit at the grown up table. When I was looking, there was like a group on the left and a group on the right and now you switched. [inaudible] Yeah, so Mark asked me to kind of come up with a way to share some thoughts about these. Keep in mind, these are really, really big projects that are summarized in like a 3-word sentence. There are obviously much more discussion as we go forward, but the way I decided to do that at just a first high level was that in terms of HR, transportation, tech, nutrition, facilities and costs all areas that I work with every day. Each of these ideas could be a high, a medium, or a low impact. High doesn't mean good and low doesn't mean bad. It could be in difficulty. So what I'm gonna really try not to share any opinion about any of these ideas because that's not - you all have opinions.  I'm just trying to give you some things that came to me that you all want to talk about. We can certainly talk about more. 

So as I mentioned, an idea could have a positive high impact or a positive, uh excuse me, or a negative high impact High doesn't mean good - well you know, that makes sense to you? I just reiterated that because I really make sure that as we go through this when you see high, that doesn't mean good necessarily. It just means a lot of thought needs to go into it. Low doesn’t means it doesn’t take a lot of thought and low doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. It might be easy to do but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be a good thing to do.  So if we move on here and they’re in no particular order other than I think the order of the original slides that Mark shared with me. 

⏯ 1:27:14 Ted Ammann: Innovation Center which certainly hearing Dorrell talk about it and I was all in, ready to vote for that one but I don’t know if I’m getting dots later. From an HR impact, certainly high impact. Looking at Reggie, because he’s here, let's say and again I’m just hypothetically. Don't [inaudible]. If McKean were to become an Innovation Center and AI and Dickinson were going to become the comprehensive high schools, there certainly is an impact because you might have an English teacher at McKean that would need to go to Dickinson or AI. Or you might need a CTE teacher at Dickinson that's going to move to McKean. So those are certainly, you know, anytime even if you're talking about one educator having to think about going to a different building, that would have a high impact. When you have lots of educators, that would be double high. I guess if that's an option but again not to say it's a bad idea It's certainly something we've worked through with new schools in the past and there's you know mechanisms to try and do that.

⏯ 1:28:07 Ted Ammann: Transportation, another super high one. You know, we touched on earlier shuttles. I have a niece who went to school outside of DC. When she was freshman, they had a program where she wanted to be a vet. She’s about to graduate as a vet. She had to take a bus to another school. The whole first week she missed lunch because her bus didn't get back. She didn't know what to do or who to tell. I'm like, well, find a guidance counselor.  She, again, freshman, didn't want to talk to anyone about it, so but it worked out. Like you know the kids are, we always say,  kids are quick to adapt. It's more adults that struggle with “how are we going to do that,” but certainly lots to think about. Cost wise there could be costs from a transportation perspective because the state model would not, as it is now, cover transportation between McKean/Dickinson or McKean and AI, and so forth, but on the flip side there could be savings because you then have two attendance zones so you only have to run buses from every neighborhood to one or the other, or both if we get to the last one on the list, but that's that's one we'll get to in a minute. So transportation certainly would be a high, you know, an area that we have to put a lot of thought and analysis into. 

Technology and nutrition, I merged together so they'd fit on the chart, no other reason, but in all these, pretty low impact. The technology that we need in any of those tools we would have it or could move it. Shawn’s giving the thumbs up and he’s got it under control. 

Facilities, medium and again this isn't really super scientific. My high, medium, low but certainly from a facilities perspective there's some real advantages, in my opinion, in the Innovation Center because right now we try and replicate three automotive labs and if one gets renovated because it's time to be renovated, if we renovate McKean’s, the next day I get a call from Dickinson saying when are you renovating mine, then I get a call from AI when are you renovating mine. So if we were to, as I understand this Innovation Center, we could really focus on having the best darn automotive lab, or the best, you know, I don't want to presuppose what those labs are, but call on any of those labs, you have some good ones now. So there's some advantages, medium. It's all doable. Cost, medium. Again we still, you know, a lot of analysis to be done. 

⏯ 1:30:20 Ted Ammann: Innovation Center, of all of them, is one that would really take the effort of the General Assembly and the Department of Ed because all of our funding is structured based on a traditional high school, where you go to the high school, you spend your day and then you go home and what we're saying is we're gonna kind of throw that up in the air and change it around.  So it doesn't mean we can't do it, but it just means that we would certainly be having to have some discussions with legislators to explain why this is a good idea, what the impact is and how they need to change the law so that we can do these things.

⏯ 1:30:50 Ted Ammann: The second one, MYP movement to Skyline. I feel like a lot of these, when we do our negotiated agreements with our bargaining groups, we string together these different ideas and I feel like like that one to me, went right along with the first one because if you're going to have an Innovation Center and have all the students assigned to one of two high schools, one of those two high schools wouldn't have enough room if the MYP program is there. So that, and again, going through HR impact, well again, if one teacher needs to move, I don't know that we can say it's a low impact but certainly it would be fewer teachers having to move just if we were to move that MYP program to Skyline. From an efficiency perspective, there's also maybe some advantages because your MYP programs, if they moved to Skyline, a teacher could teach in both the more traditional middle school program, and they could teach in the MYP program. 

⏯ 1:31:42 Unknown Speaker: I just i want to clarify just because was part of IB before. If you move MYP to Skyline, the whole school has to become IB. You can't have a - IB has the rule - you can't have a cohort. Every person has to be. So you'd have to train every teacher that stayed at Skyline to be IB. Every kid that went into Skyline would have to -

Unknown Speaker: I thought that was true of high school but not at middle. 

⏯ 1:32:08 Mark Pruitt: It - I believe she's correct, but that is much more common than what we do as a magnet program. I mean this school's, we visited a school in Brandywine School District where yes, they've got everyone trained in this in the teaching strategies and skills while also having a more focused program within the program. So I do think it's possible, but yeah, you, we're gonna find many issues, right, that we have, you know, things that we have to hurdle if we choose to move forward.

Unknown Speaker: I love IB. I love talking with kids that got access to it. So I don't even know that would be a problem, I'm just saying that it wouldn't just be shifting the kids or even -  

Mark Pruitt: Yup, that is correct. Everybody needs to be trained in the building. Yep.

⏯ 1:33:02 Ted Ammann: So where was I? Tech, nutrition would be pretty low with MYP moving to Skyline. Facilities. When you look at facilities it's the age of the kids. If you have middle school kids moving to school with middle schoolers, everything's the same. You know the rooms, come down to the bathrooms are designed for middle school kids, so that would be low impact. Cost, again, low impact from that. 

⏯ 1:33:24 Ted Ammann: Online school is something that, my personal belief, is Delaware's very behind in terms of that.  There are other states, Florida actually, has a whole school district that's online and anyone in the state can take part of it. So HR impact could be very low. It would depend, you know a lot of this depends on how it gets developed. If your online school would be something where you're using permanent, full-time teachers, you would have to earn them through the unit count and the state would have to adjust that and acknowledge that you're going to be having online students generating units. On the flip side, it could be that online teaching is being taught by teachers who want extra assignments, what we call that EPER. You know, if a teacher wants to teach an online class at the end of the day or something, they could do that or you can go with third parties to do the teaching, in which case the HR impact would not be large because you're not having - I see someone saying No, we wouldn't do it that way. Maybe not, but the HR impact in that type of program would would be low.  Online school, really in terms of all these, as I looked through them were fairly low. Costs would be a little higher because it would depend on how whether we're purchasing content from a third party or whether we're developing our own content for those types of things and again doesn't mean just because it's low across the board that's something that would say you should not do. It may just be a bad idea even though it's low impact.

⏯ 1:34:41 Ted Ammann: Charter School of Wilmington to a Red Clay high school. HR impact, it depends. It really depends on what happens to that charter school if it moves. If it moves and it's the same size, we can assume the staffing impact is fairly low. But if it were to move and grow, and again I'm not suggesting we do any of those things, I'm just saying if Charter School of Wilmington were to move from where it is to another building, and have room for additional students and our board changed their charter to allow additional students, it could take more students which could - I see someone shaking their head again - but those are just from a from an HR perspective that could have an impact depending on how that got implemented. Transportation would be low in terms of that it's definitely charter school's issue not Red Clay's issue,  but I would share that right now Charter School of Wilmington and Cab Calloway share buses. We worked with the state to allow that because we used to have a bus follow their bus and our bus would drive through the same neighborhood which is just absurd. It took years to get the state to change it, but obviously if the Charter School of Wilmington was not co-existing with a Red Clay school they would have to buy their own busing or they would have to pay us to provide busing for them. Tech, Nutrition,  again, I want to skip Tech Nutrition they're pretty much low in all these areas, my opinion. Facilities that really would not have a huge impact in terms of we would not be retrofitting a building if they were to move in to another building. That would be on them and they would start paying the operating costs of that building just like they do for their share of Cab Calloway. Cost, again, medium. It really would depend if they were to grow and that meant we had fewer students in our remaining schools, we kind of would get right back to the problem we're talking about where we have a high school that doesn't have students to generate the teachers you need so that could have a cost if we're not earning teachers.

⏯ 1:36:37 Ted Ammann: Expand Dickinson magnet 6 to 12. HR impact, again, medium. Transportation medium. The thing about the Dickinson magnet 6-12 that I was sort of thinking about, is it really would depend on how large that 6 to 12 program came because if all the students leave Dickinson and it's only the IB program but there's not enough students to fully fund the teachers that are needed at the school,  there could be an HR impact to that. Transportation would be fairly inconsequential in terms of we already have buses that run to Dickinson. They would just have high school kids and middle school kids that are part of that IB program going on those buses. 

⏯ 1:37:18 Ted Ammann: Moving AI Middle school to AI High School for 6 to 12 was one of the options. From HR impact medium if we're closing that middle school,  teachers who were working at AI Middle School would move to AI High School so there'd be some impact there. Transportation probably be low because if would actually not only be low, it might save some money because we have a bus that's picking up middle school and high school kids from the same neighborhood taking them to one school. First that gets into whether the middle school and high school kids should be on the same bus, that i think someone brought up earlier, but from a impact perspective, I consider that a fairly low one. Facilities would be high for that one because we're taking a bunch of middle school students putting them in a high school and to figure out what renovations do we maybe need to do in that high school so that the middle school students, if the middle school students are in a certain area of the high school, you know, getting that issue of middle school and high school students are somewhat separate in the school, there might be some renovation costs related to that.

⏯ 1:38:17 Ted Ammann:  Consolidated 6 to 8 programs. From a high perspective,  what happens if we consolidate those programs and it's a full middle school program? That would mean that there's a building that we're not using, what would happen to that building? By state law, if we give up a building for a surplus and a building becomes available for charter schools to use if they need to move space. So that obviously could have some impact. 

⏯ 1:38:43 Unknown Speaker: So if we just shut down a middle, and we're not moving anything over there [inaudible] do we have to put it up to the state? 

⏯ 1:38:56 Ted Ammann:  Every year we get a list from the state saying, "Are you still using all of the existing facilities?" I guess if it's no, then it goes into the inventory of state buildings and be offered to charter schools or other state agencies as an example we built a cell phone tower at Dickinson a few years ago. We were gonna rent, lease a piece of the property before we did that we had to tell the state we were surplussing that small area and there was a ton of interest. People assumed it was all Dickinson High School property and they realized it was only that small little piece in the middle and that's something you don't want. So there is a process in state code that we would have to go -

⏯ 1:39:33 Shawn Snyder: The worst case scenario is that nobody wants it. That happened to a couple of issues down state. There was like a weird abandoned school [inaudible]

⏯ 1:39:41 Ted Ammann: If you play that out if nobody wants it, you can sell it. And the cost of that goes to the state. Ultimately, it's a state asset. So in terms of cost it really would depend on what that consolidation was. 

⏯ 1:39:56 Ted Ammann: Warner Shortlidge K-8. You know we currently look at that Warner Shortlidge model as one campus from K-5. If we expanded K-8, the HR impact again would be medium because we would need additional staff members to teach the middle school classes. They may be coming from other high schools. And that translates into cost. I put medium there because one of the things that might happen is that would not be enough students going to the Warner Middle School to decrease the staff needs of the other middle schools. So it wouldn't be as simple as saying hey we have extra teachers at this other middle school, let's move them to Warner. We would have to hire extra teachers whether or not there'd be enough students to earn those units. Kind of goes back to the initial issue we've talked about at AI High School. If you don't have enough students in a school to generate the teachers that you need for a comprehensive program, it creates a problem. 

⏯ 1:40:47 Ted Ammann: Warner K-12. Obviously a high impact because you need not only middle school teachers but you also have to figure out how to jam, uh I shouldn't have said jam. Yeah, you have to figure out how to place high school students into that building. The one other high there obviously is facilities cost. Middle school is also, but high schools need sporting facilities. There are no sporting facilities at Warner other than the park across the street and Sally's football stadiums. So that would be our, that would be an expense to that. Not to mention retrofitting a high school building to hold high school students.  

⏯ 1:41:24 Ted Ammann: Capping Cab and Conrad. Medium Low. There was nothing really sticking out in terms of that, other than it kind of gets into the, again, the same issue I feel like some of these could end up creating the same issue that you've been talking about with AI high school. If you have fewer students at Cab or Conrad, you would generate fewer units for teachers to be in those schools and then we've been saying that Kendra, you have fewer kids, fewer units, which teachers are you going to give up and she'd be saying well I can't give up any of these teachers because I offer a full program here. I need a biology teacher, I need an animal science teacher, I need whatever the other topics are. So I felt like that one could actually be creating the same problem that you all are looking to resolve in terms of that.

⏯ 1:42:13 Ted Ammann: Choice busing is one that comes up quite a bit. There is no way around it. Choice in the State of Delaware is absolutely not an equitable program. You cannot get to a school unless your parent, guardian or family member is able to get you there. The HR impact for Choice busing would be very low. There would be no staff impact. Transportation would be extremely high.  We used to do limited choice busing. I did not look to see when it was. It was quite a while ago. The cost to us, at that point, was about 400 and some odd thousand dollars. Meaning every year we had to give that money back to the state because state will not pay for that choice busing.  The state could authorize choice busing. You kind of have to question why would the state authorize it in Red Clay and not authorize it in every district and if they authorize it in every district that cost just gets that much more.  But even if they authorized the funding so we're not having to send money back to the state we would then need to be - there was a slide I think you guys saw. I saw it on Mark's wall one day of our attendance zones with the middle and the lines. That would be choice busing. We'd be having to run bus routes from every neighborhood to every other possible school, which sounds great then you avoid the problem with students that can't get to a school. So from a transportation certainly a high impact. 

⏯ 1:43:41 Vic Leonard: I know in our AI Task Force, we talked about magnet school buses versus traditional. Is there a difference with the state?  

⏯ 1:43:50 Ted Ammann: The state has put enough log language in certain areas around the state that they will fund choice busing for magnet programs. So for instance, Conrad has a provision that we can because there is no attendance zone. The whole district is, in essence, the attendance zone. The problem with all of that though is even if they're funding, it doesn't mean you can do it reasonably.  What i mean by that is, if you have a district-wide busing and Conrad sees that, some of those bus rides are way too long for kids. Well there's only so many buses you can run. So if we were to do this choice busing that means, even if the state's paying their share, they only pay at most 90%, it's a debate about how the funding works out, but they're paying let's say 90% of it, the district would still be on the hook for the other 10% and we would have to add additional buses. So even if they're funding the driver, the fuel, the aid and all that it would mean purchasing additional buses, storing additional buses and all those things.

⏯ 1:44:49 Vic Leonard: Do you know the reasoning behind that with the state?

⏯ 1:44:52 Ted Ammann: The reasoning behind?

⏯ 1:44:53 Vic Leonard: Why they will they would pay for magnets versus not for traditionals? 

⏯ 1:44:58 Ted Ammann: I would only be guessing. I do not know. The choice law from the beginning has always been you have to get to the attendance zone of the school. And over time there's been a handful of places where they've put epilogue language in that says they will provide the busing, And that's why I had, the only very high in all of these was transportation and the cost. But the other thing I would think this committee wants to be really careful about if this is going to be something you want to explore, we don't know that would change the initial problem that you're looking to solve. Because there absolutely are kids who can't get to their first choice school because of transportation. Are there enough students that would suddenly go to any one of our schools based on this new busing opportunity. That might be something, if you're going to be doing surveys. We don't know how many people don't choice to a school because of transportation. Anecdotally, we've all heard of a student. But we don't know that magically doing this at whatever that cost would be, probably to the tune of a million dollars a year. Forever. Would we have any students or enough students to really make a difference to what this committee is looking? And not to, certainly it'd be great, if a student could get the school they want to go to if they can't currently get there. The other thing is related to that is we used to do choice busing but not what this option is about. When I look at this, and it's only 4 words, but when I look at it, it says any student can get to any school that they want to go to. That's not what Red Clay did. Red Clay had choice busing from some neighborhoods to some schools. That's not equitable choice busing. So the choice busing, the way this word would be much more expensive than it was in 15 or 20 years ago. Again I'm not saying it's a bad idea or a good idea. I'm saying there's a lot of impact from the cost perspective and I don't know that we have data showing that it would avoid the problems that you're all trying to resolve. 

⏯ 1:46:56 Unknown Speaker:  Can you expand that like how did they choose which neighborhoods got to - so remember they used to definitely bus Pike Creek, AI [inaudible], but I don't actually, I don't know how you guys picked - 

⏯ 1:47:12 Ted Ammann: A lot of it, from what, I wasn't here, certainly wasn't working with transportation, it came down to if parents thought to call and ask for a bus stop. It was, so right off the bat that means the parent had to know that was an option. Then again I don't want to make it sound like it was nefarious. I think it stemmed from there was a lot of redistricting, someone over this table mentioned earlier, so I think some of it started because we said hey if this student used to go to the school let's let them keep going to that school and then it grew from there. And when we started phasing it out, it was the pause and it was not - and I feel like it's people look back at it as it was a very equitable thing. I don't know that I would say it was as equitable as it was in certain neighborhoods.

⏯ 1:48:00 Unknown Speaker: Thank you. I thought it was well thought out the way you presented it. I just want to say thank you for that.

⏯ 1:48:19 Ted Ammann:  I feel like I went really, really quickly. You didn't tell me I only had 3 minutes. But also, as you get further on this, if you rule out one of these, then there's no point in giving any more thought to that. But if some of these sort of survive, like survivor, if they survive the next round, then we'd obviously go a little further into this and share some more detail. But I would say any of these can be done. Just a question of what this committee wants to bring to the top.   

⏯ 1:48:44 Mark Pruitt: Thank you very much, Dr. Ammann. So we did not get through the entire agenda. But I anticipated that as we started to dive into the issues there's going to be a lot more discussion. Meeting 1 was me give you information. Meeting 2 was an opportunity to throw some things at a wall. There was nothing that I didn't write down. But now we start to consider ideas. What are some models around the country of a couple of things? What is the feasibility of doing some things? And really, what's the impact? Is it going to be high? Is it going to be feasible? And is it going to be high impact? Is it going to change, is it going to fix the problem? Is it going to meet the goal. I think as far as the timeline goes, the only thing I would need is a consensus that we are not ready to have a town hall meeting replace our April meeting.

Jodi Muffley: No. 

Unknown Speaker: Of course not.

⏯ 1:49:43 Mark Pruitt:  Ok, so I'm gonna say that that's a consensus. We don't need to vote on that, that's not, you know, the committee does not involve, you know, a lot of Robert's Rules voting. So we'll plan on this being a regular meeting to finish the agenda from last month, alright, which is, you know, group work of relevance, of feasibility and impact. A straw poll - not a vote. Just sort of, take our temperature, right? What we'll learn from that is if no one used one of their 3 stickers, like, and something, an idea sits at zero, we may brainstorm, alright is there anything else out there now that, we chewed this, we batted this, is there anything else new? You know we want to add up here. Ok but then what the straw poll will do is allow us to maybe pull some things off, right. We learn more, it doesn't make, you know what that's not gonna work. Let's not even consider that one. You know, I'll do, I'll bring some research. Or at least some summary of some research that was in the plan all along. Seems like we need to move that forward a little bit. Have some folks on our team that do that work. Take a look at some of the research behind some of the ideas. Ok in relationship to urban, suburban, K-8, 6-12, obviously an Innovation Center. It's probably another meeting's work and I would also be ready for us to potentially, alright, what's a new timeline look like, right. What's a new timeline look like, what are we ready, you know, are we ready to present and say this is what we should do in July to the school board which is what the school board asked of us back in December. 3 of the 7 are here with us that are seeing how hard we're working. This is a great group. I'd really appreciate if you - if when I was tasked with - if they're, well, I'm gonna do - the last thing I'm gonna do is if I was, if I thought that this group was gonna be this productive, this thought-provoking, I would never have, you know, I knew it was gonna be good and it's better than that so I really appreciate it. The one thing we do have to finish with and I was told it looks like there might be someone behind us. Is there anyone that would like, that didn't already give public comment give public comment which leaves us with one person. Would you like to give any public comment?

Unknown Speaker: I'm fine. 

Mark Pruitt: Is there anyone online? It looks like we have someone online who would like to give public comment. 

Unknown Speaker: There's one person, Brenda Steffon.

Mark Pruitt: Alright, Ms. Steffon? If you can unmute yourself I believe?

Brenda Steffon: Yes. 

Mark Pruitt: And we welcome your public comment. Thank you. 

⏯ 1:52:32 Brenda Steffon: Thank you very much for allowing some public comment here. I am an alumni of AI High School. l am an active member of the really formulating Friends of AI. As we're coming together, there's a couple points that I'd like to highlight and also, excuse me, put out to the committee here. One Dr. Green's commitment and to the school board's commitment of the equitable, a program equity, equitability I'm not pretty saying that right, of programs across the schools and transportation. I think our key and what make this school district really stand out is that its ability to address the very real, raw situations that are the elephant in the room is there, right. But we're also very good as coming together as a community and that brings me to like building bridges is how you build community.  AI High School right now has really no PTA, no boosters that are active and the AI alumni has come together and has stepped in. I was just at a clean - spring cleanup this weekend and I'm impressed with the commitment of the staff. I talked to teachers there and also on the appearance of the school and it was very encouraging and think there's a lot of ways that community can bridge some of those issues that we talk about in Delaware and we can make something different. The other thing I wanted to bring up is the reminder from that, is that actually the November Board meeting, or December board meeting of last year, was the agreed upon timeline by the Board for this committee to be to be ready to present by July. So I'm going to put that out there as like that is something that us as a community are looking for and that that timeline was for the 26-27 school year as a place to have that initiated, not 27-28. And then the last thing, if i have time is that, you know, we want to make sure that we're providing that equity of programming across the district, including the charters, including the magnets, and especially specifically for the secondary comprehensive high schools and so having that conversation around those three schools is very important because it does provide access to a quality and programming that some kids may not have access to. So I think that that is a very big, big point that needs to constantly come back to that these three schools do need to have this weigh-in of their responsibility to their community. So thank you very much. I thank you all for participating in this. It is a great pleasure. Thank you.

⏯ 1:55:16 Mark Pruitt: Thank you very much, Ms. Steffon. Okay, at this point I will take a motion to bring the meeting to an end. Mr. Seconded by Ms. miss monthly All in favor? Alright, thank you very much.

🌐Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Webpage

March 20, 2025 Meeting Materials

📁Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee Meeting Rolling Slides March 20, 2025

📹Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee March 20, 2025 Recording

📄Secondary Attendance Zone & Programming Committee March 20, 2025 Meeting Minutes For convenience, the full meeting minutes are typed below. 

March 20, 2025 / 6:00 PM / RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805 Zoom Meeting (For public only. Committee members are in person.) Attendance/Welcome 

Agenda Items
Opening Items
● Public Comment
● Approve Minutes from February 19th.

New Business
● The Committee’s Charge/Goal
● Meeting Norms
● Tentative Timeline
● Redding Update/Implications
● Brainstorming Results
● Models from Around the Country
● Guest Speaker- Ted Ammann, Chief Operating Officer
● Analysis & Discussion
● Straw Poll/Narrowing the Possibilities
● Public Comment
● Adjourn 

Action Items
Next Meeting April 15, 2025 @6pm at RCCSD Board Rm, 1502 Spruce Ave, Wilmington, DE 19805
This meeting is open to the public.
The draft meeting minutes will be posted on the district’s website, redclayschools.com, within 3 business days of the meeting.