During last fall’s consolidation process, our school board demonstrated a troubling pattern of making hugely consequential decisions very quickly without seeking adequate information, dismissing meaningful community input, and not requiring evidence from district administrators that those decisions would solve the problems they were meant to address.
Attributed to declining enrollment, our district was faced with a forecasted deficit of $4 million dollars for school year 2026/2027. For comparison, this deficit is equal to just over 2% of our $185 million school budget for the 2025/2026 school year. Additionally, the district anticipates low utilization in the elementary and high schools, projected to be 59% and 61%, respectively, in the 2028/2029 school year, which makes it difficult to maintain the programming that it was committed to providing for our students. For this upcoming school year, leadership felt the best way to address both issues was to consolidate students and close schools.
Although it is a difficult decision, closing schools to address low utilization and budget deficits makes sense. School districts across the country are facing similar challenges and taking similar measures. However, what makes our scenario unique, and most concerning, is the process in which it was carried out, particularly the timeline and absence of information, all factors that were the responsibility of our school board to control.
A rushed timeline with missing analysis. In August 2025, our school board directed Superintendent Noss to develop a consolidation plan for school closures. Based on the School District’s online Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) about the consolidation, the board did not require an alternatives analysis but decided that this consolidation plan was to only focus on one school – a middle school. Note that middle schools had the highest utilization within the district, projected to be at 86% utilization in the 2028/2029 school year. Why start here?
After 4 weeks developing the proposal, the board realized that this only saved approximately $2 million and additional cuts would be needed. They then directed the superintendent to include an elementary school, as this would save approximately $1 million. Within 2 weeks, a revised proposal was developed and presented to the board. 3 weeks later the board made their decision.
Irreversible decisions despite acknowledged gaps. The board dismissed community requests to pause for a year, to use a small portion of $18 million in reserves.12.5% of the budget is set aside annually for reserves based on the 2025/2026 District Budget. If they had, the could have performed the necessary studies to collect the required information to make an informed decision and do this right.
No equity analysis was requested by the school board to understand which students may be at most risk to disruption in their education through these consolidations. No clear, measurable goals were established by the school board to show the effectiveness of consolidation. No request for or consideration of other consolidation options were made.
No coordination was undertaken with the city to understand future growth projects and the impact of this consolidation. There was no discussion on how this decision would influence the future of Crescent Valley High School – with all middle schoolers with the exception of those electing to go to Mountain View K-8 or those accepted to attend Franklin, directed to Linus Pauling Middle School, which feeds into Corvallis High School.
With minimal scrutiny and questioning, they approved the plan, voting 6-1 during a revote after midnight following 5+ hours of public comment and board deliberations.
An unvetted instructional model, approved anyway. To further complicate matters, the school board authorized an “entirely new” instructional model that accompanied this consolidation proposal, without requesting transparent evidence, clear metrics, or a plan to evaluate results. This model is still in development, and many of our educators are currently being tasked to build a new instructional model, in addition to their regular responsibilities. Currently, parents and the public know little about this proposed instructional model. Yet, they are asked to trust the process at a time when confidence in the district’s existing academic outcomes is already strained.
Aftermath. Over the course of 3 months, our school board took the community, including teachers and administrative staff, for an emotional rollercoaster ride to address a deficit that was touted to be so crippling that it needed urgent resolution. And now, with this consolidation, we face the following:
- The loss of 18+ full-time education positions.
- The closure of two neighborhood schools to save $3 million, after approximately $23 million of the voter-approved $200 million bond in 2018 was used for retrofitting and repairs.
- Overcrowding in three of the four elementary schools in North Corvallis – Kathryn Jones Harrison, Bessie Coleman, and Mountain View. Enrollment will either be near or exceeding the District’s planned capacity.
- Isolation of northeast Corvallis students from being able to ride their bike or walk on a designated safe route to their new assigned school.
- Significant logistical challenges with this plan, including ensuring safe drinking water is accessible at all schools, the potential loss of some athletic programs for 6th graders as they transition to a K-6, and further aggravated transportation and bussing concerns.
Although these can all be resolved with time and effort, the rushed timeline appears to have created a “get it done” mentality as opposed to the “do it right the first time” approach, with our students and staff bearing the blunt of the impacts. The proposed solution appears to be generating far more problems than the initial concern.
A painful bonus. To add salt to the wound, we have learned through our District’s Long-Range Financial Report presented at the January 15 Board Meeting that our District is now projecting a change of plus $6.6 million to our 2026/2027 budget, resulting in a surplus of $2.7 million. What this means is that in addition to the $3 million projected to be saved from consolidation, we are seeing additional cost savings of $3.6 million, attributed to changes unrelated to the consolidation, including local and statewide enrollment numbers, State School Fund adjustments and other changes.
This is great news, but it is also upsetting. By these numbers alone, the consolidations, and all the changes included with them were not necessary to occur at this time to address the deficit. Rather, this next year could have been spent to develop a comprehensive plan to help navigate the school district for the lean, challenging years that are anticipated ahead. It was a hasty decision made with false urgency, and it came at the cost of community trust of our leadership.
Responsible Leadership is Needed for the Hard Times Ahead
Our school board has a weighty responsibility within our community – they help shape the places, spaces, faces, and paces of the education experience in our community. Together, with the district administrators, teachers, and other education staff, their efforts contribute to the academic culture, rigor and future opportunities for our students. Their decisions can also contribute to economic vitality and future growth within our community. The leadership of our school board is paramount, as their decision making will impact all of us.
Our current board members are intelligent, highly credentialed, well-intentioned, and care deeply about this district and this community. Many of them volunteer and serve in many other ways beyond the school board. This is why we initially trusted them to lead and elected them to office. Over the last year, we have seen a troubling pattern in decision making within our school board, where collectively, weighty decisions appear reactionary, based on incomplete or in the absence of relevant data, and at times, adversarial to the community who share the same vision of wanting to see the students and staff in our district thrive. Good intentions are not an equal substitute for leadership, and the weight of poor decision making will be directly carried by the community, particularly our educators, students, and their families.
If these are the hasty measures we take to address a deficit of $4 million dollars, what happens when pressures intensify? What gets cut next? We are currently seeing drastic measures being taken in nearby communities such as Eugene where their school district is looking to cut 269 staff to address a $30 million deficit. Future cuts are knocking at our door, and our school board has demonstrated a reactionary decision process and a complacency to understand the impacts of such decisions. We need a comprehensive plan, not a quick fix.
Creating a Framework for Stability
For many, this pattern is considered too risky to be left unaddressed – waiting until the next election in 2027 means extending today’s instability and compounding tomorrow’s risks. To proceed on this current path of making rushed, unvetted decisions will only make this situation harder, and more families may elect to find education opportunities elsewhere.
And in early January, community-led petitions for recalling each school board member were submitted and approved, and signature collection is underway. The intent of this recall is to bring alignment, not blame. This recall is about realigning the board with the community’s expectations for them to lead with evidence, clarity, and accountability.
Recalls are a lawful tool of stewardship: when governance fails to meet standards of transparency, evidence, and community partnership, course correction is responsible leadership. Recalling board members who are unable to provide this leadership, to work collaboratively with the community, is not destabilizing. It is how trust is restored. It is how stability is attained. It is how opportunities for growth and excellence can be re-created.
However, this decision is up to our Corvallis community to decide, and with seven individual recalls, one for each board member, the community can reflect and decide which board members can provide the leadership that our schools need.
Some in the community have expressed fear that this recall will destabilize our school district if all seven board members were successfully recalled, causing impacts to the budget and loss of “knowledge” on the board. Although this is possible, it is highly improbable and not the coalition’s intent.
Technically, based on timelines, the 2026/2027 budget would be approved before the recall election would occur. However, the goal of the recall is realignment, not disruption. Like a doctor trying to align the bones in a broken arm before forming a cast, the intent of this recall is to get immediate community engagement to bring realignment to our school board as we navigate these challenging years ahead.
About the Save Corvallis Schools Coalition
Awareness of this reality and this risk it brings is prompting many parents and community members to ask questions, to push back on the narrative that has been given to them, and to demand honest answers and confident leadership from those guiding our school district. This led to the formation of the Save Corvallis Schools (SCS) coalition in October 2025.
This group began as a small group of parents asking what could be done after Letitia Carson Elementary and Cheldelin Middle School were both proposed for closure. The intent then was to advocate to the school board to slow the decision-making process and to work together with the community to help collect the necessary data to make an informed decision. Over time, SCS’s purpose has grown to advocate for transparent, student-centered, and sustainable decision-making by strengthening community voice, promoting accountability, and supporting strong schools for every student to have an opportunity to succeed.
We are of mixed faiths, backgrounds, socio-economic status, and political views. What unites us is the belief that academic excellence, transparency, and accountability matter—and that the challenges facing this district are too serious to delay action until 2027. Additionally, we reject all political parties’ influence on this non-partisan issue. The future of our Corvallis schools, which includes our students, staff, and families, is larger than our politics, requiring us all to “dip our paddle in the water” and work together.
Our educators deserve leadership that does not add unnecessary strain through rushed decisions and incomplete planning. Our students deserve an education system guided by evidence, clarity, and measurable goals. Our community deserves a school board that listens before it decides—and proves that its decisions will work.
Corvallis can again be known for our excellent public schools with a strong future. However, that outcome requires all of us to demand accountable leadership.
Town Hall, Thursday Night
If you share concerns about the future of our schools, please join the Save Corvallis Schools for a Community Town Hall on January 29 at 6:00 p.m. at the Corvallis‑Benton County Library.
For more discussion on fears and facts, see the Save Corvallis Schools FAQ on our website at SaveCorvallisSchools.org.
Michael Eller is a Corvallis resident and member of Save Corvallis Schools. This guest commentary may or may not reflect the views of The Corvallis Advocate, or its management, staff, supporters and advertisers.
Do you have a story for The Advocate? Email editor@corvallisadvocate.com