Jun 17 2026
Board Meeting

1. Public Comment
   ⏯11:19 

2. AZ Restructuring Committee Report
   ⏯53:26 

• 1. • Najma Landis provided an update on the AZ Restructuring Committee meeting from May 28, 2026.

     ⏯55:28

• Mark Pruitt added to the report by giving an operations update including HR, nutrition, and facilities

     ⏯1:00:52 

• Ted Ammann gave a financial update on cost of transportation, funding, facilities and staffing. 

⏯1:10:21

• Board discussion centered around the pausing the plan, community sentiment surrounding the McKean Innovation Center plan, and lack of understanding of how the plan evolved as a result of AI's declining enrollment while trying to keep the focus on student achievement. 

⏯11:19 Brenda Steffon: My name is Brenda Steffon. I'm a class of 1988 graduate of AI High School and a board member on the Friends of AI, as well as part of a Facebook group of alumni that advocate for the general welfare of the high school.

First, I want to thank Vic Leonard Sr. for your time on the board here. You have been such a vital part of Friends of AI and part of the initiation of this program. We would not be standing here without your support and initial conversations with Mr. Paul Parets, Greg Wilson, and many others. So, thank you.

I also drove by the high school today and saw that there was new landscaping in the front. I thought, "What a refreshing change!" That has looked very overgrown probably since I graduated in '88, so it was really a welcome sight to see it cleared out and to see the space revitalized along Kennett Pike. I really appreciate that visibility.

First and foremost, my time left here is to discuss: what is the Plan B if the Innovation Center does not unpause, or if the McKean community comes back out and halts it again? I want to know what the Plan B is for AI High School.

I looked today at the school report through delaware.gov. Since 2022, enrollment rates across all Red Clay high schools—except AI High School—have maintained a high retention rate. The visual impact of seeing that decline in enrollment at AI is staggering, and I hope that if you don't already see it, you will go and visit that data.

There is an AI High School enrollment problem. It is not a district problem per se, because you see retention rates maintained—if not overflowing—within the other high schools, including Delcastle Vo-Tech as well.

So, my concern is twofold:

1. We need a backup plan, and that has to come from the board. Plans need to be put together because these kids don't have other options. We have a community that is needing our advocacy and support, and I really hope that you put some thought and action into a Plan B.

2. We also need to look at hiring AI High School has 67 staff members; every other high school—Thomas McKean and Dickinson—is over 100. So that is another vital problem to look at.

Thank you for your time.

⏯53:26 Najma Landis: So I'll share, I submitted the report on the Diligent site. On May 28th, 2026, the AZ Review committee met and reviewed the charge. We reviewed the updates made regarding the resolution on the postponement of the McKean Innovation Center and discussed the conditions to unpostpone or reinstate it. We also had updates on four different areas regarding staffing and human resources, nutrition, facilities, and finance. We also had public comment that shared concerns that were echoed today regarding support for an innovation center, but if there's any discussion or thought to potential plan B's or alternatives, and then next steps. The next meeting is scheduled for August 25th at 6:00 PM at the Red Clay boardroom, and the areas that will be covered include professional learning, the Middle Years Program move to Skyline, transition, transportation logistics, and state and community support.

⏯54:58 Dorrell Green: So Ms. Stevens, we do have Mr. Pruitt and Dr. Ammann here. If you can, we put the rolling slides for the committee. It's a lot of slides in there. So if you go to slide 63 of that presentation, it starts from the last May meeting that Miss Landis just gave an update on. But we'll have Mr. Pruitt go through and then answer any questions that the board has.

⏯55:28 Mark Pruitt: Sure. These are the same slides that we used the evening of the 28th. In fact, as most of you know, these are rolling slides. This was our third meeting of this board committee. The committee is made up of seven public members, three board members, three educators, six administrators. The committee was changed a little bit, but it is a full committee of 19. We can go past the agenda though. I'm not going to stop at the agenda slide, but approved minutes from the March meeting. Next slide: meeting norms. The charge of the committee, as provided to us by the board.

Okay, what we did was the district has divided up the work into I believe 15 work groups. We had an introductory meeting in January. Communication, student services, the Meadowwood changes, and the attendance zone changes were the focus of the March meeting. And then in May, we had Dr. Ammann and his team from district facilities come out to discuss finance, facilities, nutrition, and staffing. 

Before we did that, this was the first meeting since the vote to postpone the Innovation Center. So, we discussed the postponement, the resolution to postpone, and the 11 conditions that went along in order to restart that.

That's a little preview slide of the team that was there that evening. Each time we have one of these work groups there, they give a working draft of their action planning slide, and then the proceeding slides kind of guide the discussion. Jessica Farrand from the nutrition—oh, I apologize. Dr. Dorsey from human resources was there to talk about staffing changes. He and his team met with the RCEA president and the DSEA UniServ to discuss an MOU back in the winter. A draft of that MOU was given to RCEA in January or February. They currently have that draft. We have been able to slow down a little bit with the postponement. They've given us a set of questions, and we've given them answers back and forth a couple of times over the last few months.

He really wanted to focus on the fact that we will use any contractual group's contracts for reassignment purposes. So while there is some uniqueness to reimagining and repurposing a school, as much as possible both groups want to stick to what already exists in the contract. He was then able to speak publicly that no staff members will lose their job. This is simply a reallocation of staff as to where the students will now be in home schools. That was the extent of the presentation from HR and Dr. Dorsey.

Next was Jessica Farrand from nutrition. Again, her action planning slide—I would say her efforts are backloaded. While she was on with district operations, she talked about beginning a needs assessment for staffing based on student changes, and a needs assessment on kitchen equipment. There are no major changes needed at any of our schools because all three of our high schools' kitchens are equipped to handle 1,200 plus students as they have in previous years. She did talk about coordination and working with changes for federal reimbursement for claim submissions, and also working with our logistics team.

We need to align three schools' master calendars and daily schedules. Once she has that information, there was some discussion revolving around what lunch would look like at the McKean Innovation Center—would it be kiosk style or full lunch? The answer depends on how many students stay through at the Innovation Center each day, so there was some discussion surrounding that.

This time, I am going to hand off to Dr. Ammann, who is going to talk through the facilities and finance presentations.

⏯1:00:52 Ted Ammann: Mark was on a roll, I thought maybe he would do my slides for me, but no such luck! I will try and go through this a little bit more quickly than we did that night, but I can certainly answer any questions. We had Marcin give an overview of the facilities work, and really we were focused on the finance piece of the facilities work because that was one of the first concerns raised. The overall message was that there are no additional costs related to facilities because we already had our Major Cap project approved. For instance, McKean is getting a new roof; they would be getting a new roof regardless of reimagining that building.

There are other things that we're able to do while we're doing renovations. For instance, he referenced that at AI High School, if the Meadowood program were to be moving there, they would need specific bathroom facilities, and there's funding in Major Cap for AI High to redo their bathrooms. So it would be a question of having the architects work with the Meadowood program to fine-tune those changes.

Then he went through some of the facilities related to the pathways, and McKean would certainly get some attention using the existing funding at McKean High School. That work is scheduled to begin actually this summer, as it was always scheduled to happen.

Then we got into the finance piece of it and really broke them into a couple of different categories. One was staffing. As Mark mentioned earlier, there are no plans to have staff members lose their jobs as a result of this. But specifically at AI High School, we currently do not earn all the positions that we have staffed because you earn teaching positions based on the number of kids. As the number of kids declines, you lose teaching positions, but you get to a point where you still need to have a certain number of teachers that you aren't earning.

We are currently supporting AI High School with nine teachers coming out of academic excellence units, which are units that we can use flexibly around the district to meet various needs. It's not necessarily a savings by not having those teachers at AI High School, but if AI High School had more students and was earning the teachers that are there, those units could be redeployed to another school that might have special or unique staffing needs. Or ultimately, they can be cashed into the state for funds that would go towards either curriculum materials or delaying a referendum in future years. There's no commitment to how that funding would be used, but it ultimately is a savings either in personnel that could be redeployed or the funds to cover those personnel.

A second piece we looked at is EPER contracts. EPER stands for Extra Pay for Extra Responsibilities, which are things like a football coach, an afterschool club, or SAT coordination—things that teachers are asked to do to help a school run. By looking at the current EPER contracts and what we believe we would need, there is a savings there. We negotiate those EPER contracts with our teachers union, so we can't necessarily say what would be added, but by working with RCEA, we believe there might be some new, reimagined EPER positions at McKean High School supporting some of this work.

Ultimately, there would be some savings because we had a placeholder of about $100,000 to work with over the coming years in this project to figure out what additional EPERs we'd want to add. But we certainly would be saving—just to mention the football coach example, we currently have three football coaches. If we had a football team at Dickinson and one at AI, but not one at McKean, there would be a savings for that EPER position.

We touched quickly on labs and equipment. There are certainly some efficiencies. Right now, we have a lab at McKean, a lab at Dickinson, and a lab at AI High School. Those need to be replenished every so often, depending on the type of lab. An auto mechanic lab is not as frequent as a computer lab, but there is a cost to renewing those labs. If we didn't have those labs at Dickinson and AI High, we'd likely need to add some lab space at McKean. Perhaps instead of one lab, we'd have two, but the cost of that over time would be less. We consider that not as much a savings to the district as freeing up funding dedicated to CTE programming so we could expand those labs and provide the best possible labs for the students in those pathways.

Another aspect is building operations and secondary school budgets, something that our principals look very carefully at when we do our July budget. School budgets are based on a formula partially driven by the number of students and partially driven by flat costs. When this changes, there would be savings of about $300,000 when we look at our current formula. McKean's budget would be somewhat unique, and much of that would be funded through CTE funding, so there would be savings there.

We spent most of our time talking about transportation and whether there would be savings or costs. There are two components to transportation for this:

• Instead of busing students to and from three high schools in the morning and at the end of the day, we would be busing students to two high schools.

• The cost related to the midday shuttles going from Dickinson and AI to McKean.

Looking at that first piece, based on the proposed attendance zone that would go into effect along with this, we would need to add about nine buses to AI High School and eight buses to John Dickinson School to accommodate the students going to those schools. We currently have 26 buses going to McKean. When you do the simple math, there would be a savings of about nine buses. On average, bus routes depend on mileage and multiple factors, but it's about $18,000 a year for that third tier of a bus route. Having nine fewer buses at $18,000 creates a savings on that side.

Then we talked about the shuttle piece, which is the opposite issue—obviously a cost that we don't currently have. We did some quick math (and this is a work in progress as we need to work with the Department of Education regarding bus formulas because this is a unique concept to Delaware). We looked at similar current models like Pre-K, where we have a midday busing situation. The estimate would be about $100,000 per year for the shuttles to and from AI and Dickinson.

When you put those all together in one slide—each category showing an increased cost or a decreased cost—you'll see for transportation it's actually both. There is a savings on one side and a cost on the other side. Ultimately, we do believe this would have a yearly savings once implemented as currently designed.

⏯1:08:36 Dorrell Green: Thank you, Mr. Pruitt and Dr. Ammann. Again, that was a recap of the committee meeting in a little bit more detail than what was shared, at the request of the board to give the community a deeper understanding of finance questions. We do have 11 stipulations within the resolution that we have to continue to work through with the group, but also hearing that there needs to be an alternate plan. We would need direction from the board at a certain point to determine what the board is looking for regarding the original charge of balancing enrollment, straight-line feeder patterns, and ensuring equitable programming across our comprehensive secondary schools. And again, not necessarily here, but I think we got to plan on getting that information as these 14+ committees continue to do the work. And again, our district staff members are charged with running those committees. We have an advisory group of not only community partners, the Southern Regional Education Board, the State Chamber, and others looking to engage. There's a lot of clarity we all need to ensure we are clear on the new charge from the board as we address the 11 stipulations in the resolution and ensuring that we honor the charge of balancing feeder patterns. If it's not what we currently have, then we're looking at straight-line feeders across how many schools and what those schools would ultimately be. So just some clarity.

⏯1:10:17 Vic Leonard: Any discussion? 

⏯1:10:21 Susan Sander: We could stand a little bit of discussion centered around what this is all about: our student achievement, and in any way is delaying action on this is causing adverse effects on our student achievement for our high school students. I think that's a loaded question and difficult question to answer.

⏯1:10:52 Dorrell Green: I think it's more about equity around programming and offerings, when we talk about not only such as advanced placement coursework, which students are exposed to co-curricular/extracurricular activities. I think holistically, when talking about balancing enrollment, we have to be clear that for the last 20 to 25 years we've been educating the same number of high school-age students—it's just a matter of where they're attending. If you look at that data over the same period of time each of our traditional high schools' that enrollment has ebbed and flowed—whether it was Dickinson at one point, McKean, or now obviously at AI, but I think given where we currently are, there are more choice offerings. And so I'll just give this as an example. I had the pleasure of watching the 8th-grade clap-out parade at H.B. duPont Middle School a couple weeks ago. If I had to ask the board, how many different high schools do you think just the 8th-grade class at H.B. duPont will be attending high school? How many do you think? Just a guess—no right or wrong answer.

23! Double digits.

So, 23. Our 8th-grade class at H.B. duPont Middle School alone will be attending 23 different high schools next year. In that particular case, that's a direct feeder to AI High School in essence, where you look at where a lot of those feeders go. So again, we have to spend some time to get clarity, reorient the board and the community around the data, and ultimately understanding that hard decisions have to be made given the complexity of the landscape.

We've always had students attend New Castle County VoTech. On average, we lose, if you had to round it up, maybe a thousand students a year. I think this year we had 972, with Delcastle taking the majority of those students. There's a whole host of reorienting and understanding that board members came on at different points in time with different understandings of it. As we work through the resolution, we must stay engaged and make sure the decisions we're making regarding student achievement are not just about achievement, but also about opportunity and access.

⏯1:13:26 Susan Sander: Thank you. My point is just that. Opportunities. 

⏯1:13:29 Devon Hynson: I would also like to note that we have 14 elementary schools that feed into seven middle schools, only one of which is a high-performing traditional feeder school, which is H.B. That's probably why there are that many students going to that many schools—because they are basically the exemplars in the district in terms of a feeder, high-performing, traditional middle school. I'm separating Conrad, CAB, DMA, or any other school they could feed into that is a magnet or a charter, we have one feeder school that's high-performing middle school in our district, and that's H.B. So that would only stand to reason. Choice is usually closed down or extremely filtered at H.B., to where there are relatively no students going there. 

⏯1:14:37 Dorrell Green: We have a Wilmington feeder pattern feeds into H.B. as well.

⏯1:14:42 Devon Hynson: Right, I'm not saying there's not, All I'm saying is that would be the reason why they go to 23 different schools. They have options. 

⏯1:14:51 Beth Twardus: There are 23 options out there, at least. 

⏯1:14:53 Dorrell Green: Well, more than that. Even if you look at the Redding work and students who reside in the city of Wilmington, if we look at the Redding data in conjunction with the American Institutes for Research, city of Wilmington is represented by over 37 different high schools. So I'm saying a city of Wilmington resident. So a city of Wilmington resident who lives in the city of Wilmington are at one point per the data the idea that Redding, through the analysis they're going to 37 different high schools. So the idea that it's just our high-performing school who is accessing choice isn't the whole picture. It's the reality of New Castle County, and proximity to schools is also a factor. We have students residing in Wilmington who literally go to Early College Academy in Dover, that reside in Wilmington.

Families who have the means are able to access choice. Every New Castle County VoTech was represented, and pretty much every private, independent, and parochial school was represented. There's just a lot of choice within our district, mobility, movement, opportunity, and options within our district. One of our private independent schools made an announcement yesterday that they won't be fielding a football team, and that's a two-time state championship football team. There is a lot of mobility, but for us we have the broader, the symptoms are more prevalent here because of where choice and charter started and the geography that we cover. As a district, we're the proverbial microcosm of the state when we talk about mobility across schools. So it's a "both/and" to your point.

⏯1:16:57 Vic Leonard: Yeah, I have a comment. We're ignoring one big thing that has been happening in the last few months: it was the unhappiness of the McKean community. They filled the gym at one of our meetings and were very boisterous. How are we going to approach that to bring them back on board where this whole plan goes forward, and if we can't, what's the alternative plan?

⏯1:17:26 Dorrell Green:  And so again, I think if you talk about challenges around Meadowood programming, there are work groups that have family representatives on that workgroup, though not all families' voices were represented here in the board meeting. And again, I just think it's a matter of engagement, and sometimes you have to make hard choices even in the face of opposition or the appearance of opposition and that's not to say you know how can we engage them but the reality of it is we have to be cleareyed about how we analyze and look at those numbers and can we do again a better job I think again reflecting on not everyone in the community is connected to our district channels so when we talk about how information flows and how you get information out to the broader community is is something that we we can improve upon because again not everyone's connected to the Red Clay Facebook page and so when we put information out not everyone is getting the information and so how do you engage and ensure but we do have again the work groups where staff members are at the table um and and going back to October last year when we visited those schools we encouraged those staff members to have a seat at the table to help inform the process And so some of the same public comments or sentiments that you heard were from some of the same public comments or sentiments you heard were from individuals who actually have a seat at the table to help inform decisions moving forward. Staff members on those committees understand the nature of the work and have rolled up their sleeves. 

We need to continue to use the committee format that that board has shared information and have these discussions as you're doing now, and then understanding that at a certain point it's going to come to the realization that a decision has to be made. Again I think we have a new new board dynamic and onboarding and having clarity around what those numbers are revisiting that information so that the current board moving forward will help the current board moving forward be clear about where our points of growth and opportunity are. To Mr. Hynson's point, understanding that decisions made long ago—as my grandmother would say, "the chickens have come home to roost." No one really know what the impact of decisions 20 years agom 25-30 years ago when you started a choice program in terms of the implicaitons.. We have a lot of opportunities and offerings, there's probably only 1 other district that has a 6-12th grade configuration programming and three of our schools are configured for 6th through 12th grade. Again there's a lot things may need to be course-corrected, but hard decisions will have to be made.

⏯1:20:12 Vic Leonard: So to clarify, the McKean Innovation Center will move forward regardless of any public pushback, is that correct?

⏯1:20:22 Dorrell Green: Again, I, I don't think anyone can plant a flag there and say that. Ultimately, it's for us to take direction from the board. We are here because we took charges from the board. We started the initial, four years ago when you came on the board.  Day one there were six motions made, and one of those was to look at the enrollment at AI. The AI Task Force was started. Again there was a little resistence then but through that AI task force, a lot of good information was shared, researched, and gleaned. That led to an understanding of what needs to happen not only at AI, but in order to look at balanced enrollment impacted our middle schools because we don't have straight-line middle schools.

Even if choice wasn't an option, our current 8th graders across our four traditional middle schools don't feed into a singular high school based on address. If we look at the 8th-grade class at Alexis I. duPont Middle School, they're still slated to go to three different high schools despite being in close proximity to AI High School. That was part of the later charge of looking at straight-line feeders because in 2015, when Cooke came online, the district made the decision to have straight-line feeders for our elementary schools going into our middle schools. Now we have that disconnect.

When you layer that with choice—"I'm going to go where my friend goes," "I'm going to go where they have a program of interest or study," or "I'm going to go where they have the sports team I want to play on because Dickinson doesn't have a field hockey team"—those are the decisions through all the recommendations that have gotten us to this point.

⏯1:22:05 Devon Hynson: Hold on, let me ask a question. Mr. President, are you telling me that you're confused as to the status of the Innovation Center?

⏯1:22:16 Vic Leonard: Well, from what I saw at some of these meetings, there were some public members who were pretty upset. I'm just wondering how we're going to address that if it's going to happen again and we have another full gym of McKean community members. Do we still want to move forward, or are we going to have another pause? I don't know.

⏯1:22:42 Devon Hynson: Do you understand the status of the Innovation Center?

⏯1:22:48 Susan Sander: It's paused.

⏯1:22:49 Devon Hynson: Right. I guess I'm trying to understand, because you said that it's going to move forward—does it matter? It sounded like, I just don't understand the nature of that question if you understand that it's paused.

⏯1:23:06 Vic Leonard: The nature is that you had a bunch of people who here protesting against McKean being an Innovation Center, and we're just ignoring that like it didn't happen.

⏯1:23:17 Devon Hynson: Oh, you mean...I think that Ms. Landis made it clear that it would not move forward without those conditions being met.

⏯1:23:27 Vic Leonard: The conditions of the?

⏯1:23:29 Beth Twardus: Of the resolution that we all voted on.

⏯1:23:32 Vic Leonard:   No, no. I'm talking about the community from McKean. They're not talking about the pause; they're talking about not having an Innovation Center there. That was quite clear.

⏯1:23:43 Devon Hynson: Okay, if the conditions aren't met, then it won't happen. Right?

⏯1:23:47 Susan Sander: Can I just ask how close we are to some of those conditions? I believe some of your information tonight addressed those. Was I hearing that right? A lot of public comment

⏯1:24:01 Mark Pruitt: Tonight? From me?

⏯1:24:02 Devon Hynson: No, none of those conditions have been met. 

⏯1:24:05 Susan Sander: Well addressing.

⏯1:24:06 Devon Hynson: You're reaching.

⏯1:24:07 Mark Pruitt: I would say we have continued...

⏯1:24:09 Susan Sander: Ticking off some of those 11 conditions.

⏯1:24:13 Mark Pruitt: First, Mr. Leonard asked the question that Dr. Green answered, but I would say: how do we get McKean on board? I know that we work with subcommittee members—which are upwards of 50 staff members, the majority McKean staff. We've continued those meetings, and they are very engaged. They care deeply about their school and certainly are emotional about potential changes, but to answer your question, Mr. Leonard, they are still deeply engaged in the work.

I was really surprised by that when I went out to the next McKean Innovation work group meeting. I said, "Hey, do you want to postpone the last one?" And they said, "Well, no, why would we do that? We've got great momentum here." So we did and we continued to work. 

As far as the work on the 11 conditions, a couple of those we already have—we've done a lot of work on an equity audit and an IDEA compliance audit. We have that information; it's just a matter of getting it in place for you. 

When you talk about engaging students and communicating more broadly in multiple languages using different vehicles of doing that, it's been our take that we are planning for that now, but that is far better done in September, October, and November than it is the second half of April and May.

⏯1:25:42 Devon Hynson: Well, let me say this. I think the community made it clear because when I talk, I say one thing and you all hear something different. I think it's because you guys are institutional thinkers and I'm an advocate—I fight for the community out and out. When they say, "We just don't understand what's going on," you hear, "They don't want change, they want it to be back to the way it was back in the day." That's not what they're saying. What they're saying is that this doesn't make any sense.

The people that were at the table expressed disagreement that was ignored, and then the plan just kept running downhill—and I'm not saying you personally but the plan continued to move forward. We're even doing it tonight by asking, "How do you make people believe in it?" You make people believe in it by selling a product that makes sense for a person to buy. Just like in sales, if you market something and educate the consumer, then you can sell that product. The problem is it hasn't been sold to the community because it doesn't make sense.

When people ask, "What's the budget?", we don't know. "What about special education services?", we don't know. "You're saying it's 10 minutes to travel from school to school...", people are not going to believe that you're talking about upending the entire secondary, changing bus routes for the entire district because one school is underperforming. To ignore all of the input you got from the community—because for some reason every time I say that everybody says what input. Everybody that was on the committee from the community, even some teachers, said they didn't agree with it. They didn't understand how they got to a place where they were talking about an innovation center when it started with attendance zone. We were trying to figure out why AI had such low enrollment. That's what it started out as. 

Somewhere it transitioned between meeting 1 and 2 and we're talking about an Innovation Center. 

⏯1:28:08 Dorrell Green: It transitioned because we were told to look at—

⏯1:28:10 Devon Hynson: I get it, but hold on hold, Doctor. I understand that. My point is if you do not hear what's being said... I guarantee you that if the people at McKean are involved in a process that makes sense, Education is an research-based, an evidence-based service. At the end of the day if you tell them the science behind what you're doing, they're going to agree with it, and then you can move forward. But you can't move forward if you don't know the science behind it. There are too many questions that are unanswered for us to have just skipped to a solution to a problem we don't even know the root cause of. That just doesn't make any sense. 

⏯1:28:55 Susan Sander: Once again, student achievement has to be our greatest focal point at this point. Our student achievement. I don't believe we're servicing our AI High School students adequately or equitably at this point. I think we have to keep what is most important to us, our community, and to an extent our taxpayers, and this plan financially makes a lot more sense. So I think, looking at the greater picture—student achievement, response to public opinion (which we've addressed in terms of transportation, budget, savings), and our debt to our taxpayers—I think this, tonight, has been a huge step forward. So thank you, everybody on the committee. I, for one, appreciate all the work you're doing and all the nights you're putting in, all the meetings you're going to because you have your eyes on the prize: students. Any other discussion?

⏯1:30:08 Devon Hynson: No. Everybody heard all they needed to hear. [laughter]

📁AZ Review Committee May 28, 2026 Meeting Update

🌐Attendance Zone Restructuring & Review Committee Webpage

📁Attendance Zone Restructuring & Review Committee Rolling Slides