Nov 21 2025
Board Meeting

▼Full Transcript Below

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

   • • 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

   • • 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

   • • 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.

⏯ 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.