Consolidation Final Report - 20-14 Rev PDF

2014
PRE-KINDERGARTEN THROUGH GRADE 12

REORGANIZATION STUDY
CONTAINED HEREIN IS THE ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS OF

THE FOUR REORGANIZATION SCENARIOS
CHARGED BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
for the
KENMORE-TOWN OF TONAWANDA
UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT
1500 Colvin Boulevard

Buffalo, New York 14223
1
Introduction
On October 2, 2012 the Ken-Ton Board of Education and the Superintendent of Schools worked together
in a public workshop session to answer the following question:
What are the key questions/data that our Ken-Ton school community needs to answer/discuss about
how best to organize and deliver the grades pre-kindergarten through grade twelve program to the
pupils of our community over the next three years?
The purpose of the effort was to create a written tool by the Board and Superintendent that would help
guide the study and help public discussion about the short range and long range future efforts of the
school district.
Rank Key Questions/Data Identified and Rank-Ordered by the Ken-Ton
Order Board of Education and Superintendent on October 2, 2012
1 The options should identify the number of buildings and staff necessary for both short term and long term
viability of the district benchmarked to potential future enrollments and historical staff turnover.
2 We hope the options identified by the study will first focus on student programming and community pride of the
schools and then on efficient use of resources listing the opportunities and challenges for each scenario option.
3 How can we use this study not to just survive, but to fulfill our 20/20 Vision and to get even better as a
district?
4 How can we ensure that the community has a voice in the study?
5 How can we use this study opportunity to further our progress with the multiple pathways effort for students at
Ken-Ton?
6 How can we stop eliminating student programs due to financial constraints?
7 How can we operate more efficiently and improve teaching conditions at the same time?
No matter the outcome of the findings of the study, we want to make sure we maintain our strong, positive
8 relationship with our staff and community.
How will the findings of the study help the district better meet student needs?
How will the study findings help us identify what the key obstacles are that are blocking us to achieve excellence
9 across the board right now?
Will the study findings take into consideration the districts current policies, practices and values with respect to
transportation bus routes, times, walking to school patterns?
When we examine the findings of the study, how do we look beyond the data to understand the real impacts on
10 the students?
Are there certain patterns of student achievement one can expect and corresponding data to grade level
configuration patterns?
How can the findings of this study produce better results from the efficiency standpoint of all the districts
11 previous long range plans?
What outside factors need to be considered with the findings of the study? (Example: private schools, other public
schools, charter schools?)
If one of the options identified by the study includes redistricting, what opportunities and challenges are there
12 concerning the effect on students from a neighborhood school to one that is farther away?
If there is a consolidation, what factors will go into deciding which scenario should be chosen? If a scenario
points to a particular building to be closed, is there data to support that?
Are the scenario options described in the findings of the study Doable?
13 How can the community and district work together to be sure that they remain unified with whatever scenario
option, if any, is chosen?
14 What might need to be done to our buildings in order to implement a particular scenario or scenarios?
How can we use this study opportunity to future-proof the district?
15 Are there options that might provide us with long-term stability?
2
Preface
An external consultant, the SES Study Team, had been hired by the district during the 2012-2013
school year to create the goals and objectives above. Prior to our experience with these
consultants, the district had already decided to close one elementary school effective for the
2013-2014 school year, Jefferson Elementary. That closure was more of a closed process with a
specific student disbursement methodology, and that work came on the heels of yet another
challenging annual budget process for the school district. At the time that process was decided
upon, the superintendent of schools and Board of Education desired to refrain from further class
size increases and/or student program reductions. However, it was clear by 2013 that the changed
economy would have a much longer impact on the school district, and the school district had
fallen into the practice of using reserves each and every budget year.
At the time, the SES Study Team was charged to suggest any number of scenarios that could be
implemented for the 2014-2015 school year. However, after that process had concluded the
Board of Education decided to charge the administrative team with a further analysis of four
distinct scenarios, some of which would possibly be initiated after the 2014-1015 school year.
This was due to much public input at the time which suggested that any type of far reaching
consolidation scenario should happen only once in the mid to long range, if at all possible.
Therefore, the four scenarios the board charged the administrative team to analyze increased the
scope of the original study, although some of the scenarios were related to the original SES
Study Team work. In the interest of saving space, all of the SES Study Team reports, which are
extremely important to understand, are still archived at the school districts website homepage
behind the Consolidation Project tab. A link to those materials is here, and it is important that
the faculty and community understand the reports before reading this final consolidation report:
http://www.kenton.k12.ny.us/domain/1753
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Pages Title
1 4-7 Our District Through the Years
2 8-10 Grade Configuration Research Review
3 11 Projected Jefferson Elementary School Savings
4 12 Private School Choice Historical Trends
5 13-14 Taxes, Taxes, Taxes!
6 15-16 Understanding Capital Building Aid and Why Placing Non-
Instructional Services into Viable Instructional Spaces Does Not Pay
7 17-19 Reuse of Buildings and Historical Valuation Data
8 20 Open Enrollment Implications
9 21-23 Deficient Building Conditions
10 24-25 Capital Debt Owed on District School Buildings
11 26-27 Solar and Wind Energy Enhancements
12 28-32 Reconciliation of Unanswered SES Study Team Findings &
Suggestions
13 33-37 Shared Staff Real Cost Savings from SES Findings
14 38-67 Faculty, BOE Member, and Parental Input regarding Two Unique
Programs
15 68-69 School District Reserves and General Fund Balance Usage
16 70-74 Why Mid to Long Range Sustainability is Jeopardized in our School
District
17 75-77 More State Aid and Lower Class Sizes May Not Be All We Need
18 78-80 Latest Enrollment Projections
19 81-130 Environmental Scans of the Scenarios by District Personnel
20 131-135 Methodology of Scenario Analysis
21 136-168 Scenario Analysis Findings
169-178 Appendix
179-182 Acknowledgements
4
1. Our District Through the Years
Our school district was once the center of one of the largest suburban Town and Village growths
in our nation. The school districts peak enrollment years occurred during 1965-1970, and this
excerpt from a May 1982 school district office school closure process document is telling:
The closing of a school is a dramatic event in a school community. The Kenmore-Town of

Tonawanda (Ken-Ton) School District has closed 14 elementary schools and two auxiliary
educational facilities since 1974. In the last eight years, we have learned how to close schools
with a minimum of disruption, dissension, and trauma.
Over the years, as schools have been closed, the basic concerns of public school parents and
other residents have been expressed by the questions that follow:
Where will our children go to school if our school is closed?
What will class size be in the new school?
Will present programs and services be continued in the new school?
Will transportation services be provided to the new school?
Will there be crossing guards along the route to school?
What will be done with the school that is closed?
Other questions that are invariably asked by parents and other residents include:
Why are schools being closed?
How will the decision to close a school be made?
Will parents have an opportunity to contribute to the decision-making process?
What will happen to staff in a school to be closed?
How much money will be saved by closing a school?
If a school is closed, will our taxes go down?
The answers to the questions listed above make up the body of this article. It is hoped that other
school districts struggling with the challenges of declining enrollment and the underutilization of
staff and facilities will be helped by Ken-Tons experiences.
WHY ARE SCHOOLS BEING CLOSED?

The Ken-Ton School district experienced a peak pupil enrollment of about 22,350 in 1965.
Between 1950 and 1964, the school district opened 18 new schools, with 12 of the schools
constructed between 1955-60. As new schools were opened, the community experienced the
disruptions of growth and expansion with pride. Pupils were transported from their home
communities to new schools, or temporarily, to holding schools. Teachers, administrators, and
support staff were reassigned to meet the districts needs.
By 1975, enrollment had decreased to 17,500, and there are currently 11,500 pupils enrolled
(1982). In 1974, in response to declining elementary enrollment, the district began to close
elementary schools. The schools were as follows:
FACILITY GRADES YEAR CLOSED

Clinton K-6 1974
Heritage K-3 1974
Sheridan Annex LEC 1975
5
Mann K-6 1976

Frost K-3 1977
Lincoln House MR 1977
Addams K-3 1978
Brighton K-6 1978
Ross K-2 1980
Longfellow K-3 1981
Green Acres K-6 1981
Lincoln K-6 1981
To further illustrate the districts changing enrollment pattern, the K-6 enrollment in the 1970-
71 school year was 10,490 pupils. By 1980-81, K-6 enrollment had declined to 5,127. In
September 1981, pupils in grade six were assigned to the districts three middle schools, and the
K-5 enrollment in the eleven elementary schools is 3,964.
In 1981, in spite of closing 12 schools, school facilities and staff continued to be underutilized
and school district resources inefficiently expended. In fact, the closing of one or more schools
would make possible the improvement of the financial structure of the district by reducing
operating costs and developing new revenue sources by the lease or sale of buildings. The
districts ENCORE! program demonstrates clearly that the alternate use of facilities can bring
new income to the school district and new services to the community.
A well written official school enrollment document created on 2/25/78 is included in the
appendix of this report. In that day, computer generated graphs and databases were not readily
available as they are today.
The following image depicts our school districts Northeast portion in 1951. You can see
Niagara Falls Boulevard, Brighton Road, and Eggert Road. Obviously, Ken-East, Green Acres,
and numerous other schools had not yet been built. The school district enrollment at the time
was around 8,800 students. That is almost 1700 more students than we have today in 2014. We
were running only eight schools at the time. A point of consideration is schools were built into
neighborhoods not only because homes were being built, but because there were numerous
school age children in them. We clearly still value the neighborhood school concept in our
district and community; however, most of our neighborhoods today dont have multiple school
age children, and many homes have no school age children in them. Demographic studies
performed by the SES Study Team and more recently by the Town of Tonawanda both show a
sharp increase in single people actually buying or renting homes.
A conclusion of this data gets to the sustainability issue in our district. While our neighborhood
schools are still spread over most of our geographic location it has become more and more
challenging to operate them effectively due to our changing demographics and increased costs.
In 1967-68, the district added numerous classroom wings to schools, especially secondary
schools. At the time it did not realize that the enrollment peak had already been reached. In
1969, the Board of Education authorized a study to further analyze the district. The Halloway
report, Building Needs In The 70s predicted leveling off at 16,000-17,000 students. However,
the population decreased at a faster rate and it did not level off at the 16,000-17,000 range.
6
These wings of additional classrooms are one of the reasons we have extra secondary space
today.
The number of students enrolled in our school district this school year is generally the same as it
was in 1947.
7
District Enrollment 2013-14 Total Buildings

Syosset CSD 6500 10
Central Islip UFSD 6502 8
Connetquot CSD 6529 11
Uniondale UFSD 6548 8
Saratoga Springs SD 6574 8
Hempstead UFSD 6600 12
Kingston City SD 6676 14
Freeport UFSD 6683 8
West Seneca CSD 6800 12
Elmira City SD 6928 13
Commack UFSD 6934 8
East Meadow UFSD 7041 9
Three Village CSD 7050 8
Ken-Ton UFSD 7100 12
Monroe-Woodbury CSD 7124 7
White Plains City SD 7167 7
Liverpool CSD 7278 13
Middletown City SD 7290 7
Levittown UFSD 7359 10
Massapequa UFSD 7400 9
9.15 Building Average
The table above indicates all of the school districts in our state with student enrollments between
6,500 and 7,500 this school year. Some of these districts are in upstate New York, but many of
them are either in Nassau or Suffolk County in Long Island and enjoy extremely wealthy tax
bases. This year, our school district is operating almost three more schools than this tables
average of twenty school districts.
8
2. Grade Configuration Research Review

Grade Configuration and School Size Research
Mark P. Mondanaro, Superintendent of Schools
August, 2013
Generally, there is evidence to indicate that school size, in and of itself, may not be the primary
factor impacting student achievement. There is some research to suggest smaller schools perform
better, and there is some research to suggest they may not be, in and of itself, a major factor.
There is also some research to suggest certain grade level configurations are better than others in
terms of achievement impact, yet others suggest, as a major single factor, grade level
configuration does not have a large impact. Research in all cases depends upon the method used
as well as sample size.
This sampling illustrates the points above:
In the United States, contrary to most other findings in the literature, the evidence suggested
that bigger schools perform better. Only for Norway we concluded that school size and student
performance are entirely uncorrelated. Overall, it seems as if student performance is
uncorrelated with school size in most countries, but if a significant relationship is estimated, it
mostly implies that bigger is better ( Schtz, Gabriela 2006)
School size reforms often occur as part of a portfolio of reforms to school policies, such as
governance practices, curricular reforms, and human resource policies. Thus, an empirical
challenge presents itself when trying to isolate the effects of just one dimension of a school
reform package. A weakness of much of the existing studies on school size effects is that they are
cross-sectional in nature, and thus they fail to clearly isolate the effects of variations in school
size from other reforms occurring at the same time(Kisida, 2013)
In this section we discuss the results from each of our model specifications. Our results reveal
two key findings, which point to the importance of school size as a contributing factor to student
achievement growth. First, school size has a significant impact on student achievement in both
math and reading. Large schools with enrollments greater than 590 students have significant
negative impacts on student academic achievement. Second, these impacts vary by grade level.
In grades 6-10, school size has the greatest effect with student achievement significantly
declining in schools that enroll more than 638 students (Kisida, 2013)
This paper presents a regression model that analyzes the effects of school enrollment and
schools per district on costs per pupil and standardized test passing rates in Indiana elementary
and secondary schools. This model employed data from the Indiana Department of Education
and the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. The results showed that districts with more schools had
higher costs per pupil and that a schools enrollment had no significant effect on student
achievement. In addition, the results suggest that school consolidation could cut costs while not
necessarily lowering student achievement levels (Steiner, J. (2011).
9
Some research points to lower achievement performance in larger schools for students of low
socio economic status, and earlier studies through the late nineties seemed to indicate schools
with no more than 900 students seemed to perform better than those of the grade level
configurations that were larger than that. There is research to suggest that numerous transitions
may not have a positive effect on students, especially female students.
Research has been cited to indicate the worth of neighborhood schools and it has been stated that
our school district was built upon neighborhood schools at the elementary level. Statements that
values of homes decreasing due to a closed neighborhood school should be researched as there is
evidence to suggest that this is not the case in our school district. In fact, depending on what is
done with closed schools recent history of sales may preserve or increase surrounding home
values, and the tax base may be increased depending upon what the school or school site is used
for after it is sold. This was the case at the site of the former Brighton School which was sold,
demolished, and replaced with a well-designed and built senior living complex. There may be
other uses for school buildings or district buildings that are sold which may help the community
meet other needs it deems important. Senior living and higher education possibilities are just two
examples, and there may be others.
Finally, there is much research that points to the correlates of effective schools, and these
correlates may be exercised in small, medium, or large schools. The correlates are well
documented in the research (Lezotte, Larry 1991, 2009):
1. Instructional Leadership
The effective school practices that the principal is the "leader of leaders" not the "leader of
followers." The principal understands and applies the characteristics of instructional
effectiveness in the management of the instructional program. The principal and all adults must
take an active role in instructional leadership.
2. Clearly Stated and Focused Mission
The effective school has a clearly articulated mission. The staff shares an understanding and
commitment to the mission and the instructional goals, priorities, and assessment procedures it
projects. The staff accepts responsibility and accountability for promoting and achieving the
mission of learning for all students.
3. Safe and Positive Environment
The effective school has a positive, purposeful, businesslike environment, which is free from the
threat of physical harm. Desirable student behaviors are consistently articulated and expectations
are clear. Students and teachers help each other and what is best for all. This environment
nurtures interaction between students and teachers that is collaborative, cooperative, and student
centered.
10
4. High Expectations for ALL Students
The effective school expects that all students can attain mastery of the essential school skills. In
order to meet these high expectations, a school is restructured to be an institution designed for
"learning" not "instruction." Teachers and students must have access to "tools" and "time" to
help all students learn.
5. Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress
The effective school frequently measures academic student progress through a variety of
assessment procedures. Assessment results are used to improve individual student performance
and also improve instructional delivery. Assessment results will show that alignment must exist
between the intended, taught, and tested curriculum.
6. Maximize Learning Opportunities
The effective school allocates and protects a significant amount of time for instruction of the
essential skills. The instruction must take place in an integrated, interdisciplinary curriculum.
Effective instruction time must focus on skills and curriculum content that are considered
essential, that are assessed, and most valued. There should be abandonment of less important
content.
7. Positive Communication -School, Home, Community
The effective school builds trust and communication within the school, parents and community.
Forming partnerships with the parents and community enables all stakeholders to support the
mission of the school and have the same goals and expectations.
A comprehensive grade configuration and school size literature review is contained here,
complete with live links if you wish to explore some research further on your own.
http://ecap.crc.illinois.edu/poptopics/gradeconfig.html
11
3. Projected Jefferson Elementary School Savings
Another request we have heard during this project was to quantify what we felt the Jefferson ES
closing saved in terms of real dollars. Although the first school year in which it closed is not
over, we project the following savings:
All personnel = $1,671,210 (salary and benefits)
Utilities = $31,000
Technology = $24,000
There are amounts regarding some building budget items, maintenance, utility and food service
operational functions that can be better quantified after the school year ends. The impact on the
transportation department was negligible. The closing plan enacted last year worked fairly well,
and we followed up with staff this year to see how things were going. Students seem to have
adjusted well; some parental feedback indicates the same.
12
4. Private School Choice Historical Trends
One of the topics we heard throughout the project was the impact of school closures on our non-
public school population. In fact, it was common to hear about our non-public school enrollment
percentages even before the project began. It is not possible to predict now what the impact
would be if the Board of Education enacts one of the scenarios as a reorganization of the district
later.
We have followed trends of our non-public enrollment percentages:
SCHOOL
YEAR PERCENT
1999/00 23%
2000/01 20%
2001/02 23%
2002/03 22%
2003/04 21%
2004/05 20%
2005/06 20%
2006/07 22%
2007/08 22%
2008/09 20%
2009/10 20%
2010/11 20%
2011/12 19%
2012-13 20%
2013-14 21%
Our school district has a very long history of non-public school choice. We have some popular
Charter and non-public schools right within our district, and many within attendance distance
outside of it. The notion that more and more students are attending these schools, however, is not
supported by data. In 1992 our school district won the states first ever Governors Excelsior
Award for Excellence. We were the first district in the state to receive that award. That same
year nearly 19% of our students were attending non-public schools. Non- public school choice
has always been popular in our school district, and the district leadership went as far as to
promote nonpublic school attendance during the booming school age population years.
Since a large part of this project is actually based within program analysis, it should be pointed
out that the concept of opening up one of our own themed school choices for the first time in the
history of the district is included in one of the scenarios for consideration. Perhaps the time has
come for our public school system to create some viable program choice itself.
13
5. Taxes, Taxes, Taxes!
As we have seen, the tax rate in our district has grown exponentially over the years. It was not
always that way. There was more industry in the distant past, state aid increases were larger from
year to year, and our growing tax base was a strength of our district and communities. Today, we
have come from the bottom half of school district tax rates, right up to the top five in our area. At
the same time, the tax base has slowed and even lessened, and all the time our salary, benefit,
and expenses rose. (See table on next page)
This has shifted more pressure to the taxpayers of the school district. While we appreciate the
support of the community and our unions to pass school budgets, the reality is just this school
year our student population free or reduced lunch rate percentage jumped over the 40%
threshold. While there are some residents living in subsidized housing the reality is the annual
tax bill has become more of a burden for many families. Remember that our housing stock is
older and we do not have a large amount of more modern homes with large backyards and four
bedrooms in our school district. This has become an impediment for some younger families
moving into our district as the fact that we have become a high taxing school district might make
our appeal even more challenging.
Finally, even those renting homes feel the pinch of higher taxes in the form of increased rents
and the impact of these tax bills on our ever increasing fixed income population is being felt as
well.
We know the health of our school district has a direct impact on the health of the larger
community. At the same time, it is difficult to understand how taxing and spending at these rates
will better the health of either.
14
15
6. Understanding Capital Building Aid and Why Placing Non-Instructional Services into
Viable Instructional Space Does Not Pay
Over the course of this project timeframe various community members and staff alike asked the
Board of Education to consider utilizing non-instructional buildings to a larger extent. The Board
of Education charged the administrative team to obtain legitimate appraisals on three (3)
different non-instructional buildings. The results of those appraisals were then included in a
much more detailed analysis of what it would cost to then move the needed programs and
services that are in those buildings to other non-instructional buildings. Due to zoning
restrictions and usability of the particular buildings in the study, this option was not shown to
create savings for the school district. In fact, it showed nearly a six million dollar loss. The
results of that study are at this link:
http://www.kenton.k12.ny.us/cms/lib/NY19000262/Centricity/Domain/1753/SCHOOL%20DIST
RICT%20NON%20BEDS%20BUILDING%20APPRAISAL%20DISBURSEMENT%20E.pdf
Although that particular study did not prove prudent for the district the conclusion was it may not
mean that the concept could somehow be fruitful in a different way, at least to some degree.
Following the publication of that report the Kenmore Teacher's Association requested that the
district look more closely at placing some non-instructional operations into remaining school
buildings that are being used for instruction, citing this has been done in other districts. We
believe it is always important to understand why a particular action has worked in another school
district before decisions are made to replicate the same actions ourselves. As we began to look at
this request more closely it occurred to us that this should be an option when it makes total
financial and conditional sense for the very same buildings.
A major point that may have been overlooked on this topic is the condition of our buildings.
While understanding all of the buildings are many years old, it's possible that many people do
not understand that a well thought out, decades old building improvement plan for those
buildings has not been in place. Staff has worked hard to keep the buildings clean, and the
community has supported some capital improvement projects over the years, but a detailed phase
after phase upkeep and improvement plan only started seven years ago. Therefore, there are
numerous deficient areas in our buildings today. Reducing the amount of students in portions of
buildings actually decreases the ability to generate state capital aid in those very same buildings
varying in conditions of repair. Some of the thinking was there could be aid to create
administrative spaces in those buildings. The thinking is reversed-we are struggling, at best, to
keep up with the building conditions. We don't need to spend costly dollars moving non-
instructional services into "live" school buildings while decreasing their capital state aid. This
must be avoided.
Moreover, it may very well be possible to sell some non-instructional property and better use
non-instructional space in our district without further damaging the district's ability to achieve
high state aid ratios for capital improvements in those instructional buildings. The aidability of
our instructional buildings is based upon the number of students and the number of teaching
stations in each building. The manner by which to finally improve teaching and learning
conditions in them is to actually increase the amount of students and teaching stations in those
very same schools, as opposed to forcing non-instructional services into them. This report does
end up making a "core" non-instructional building use change we believe achieves that goal
16
without sacrificing future capital aidability in our live instructional spaces. More information
regarding how capital state aid is generated is included here from the New York State Education
Department website:
http://www.p12.nysed.gov/facplan/publicat/building_aid_guidelines_072804.html
17
7. Reuse of Buildings and Historical Valuation Data
Another concern we have heard over the course of this project was the possible negative effect
on surrounding home values when district schools close. We utilized actual assessments through
the Town of Tonawanda and performed an analysis of the data. One set shows the effect that re-
use has had on the closed schools, and the other set shows sales analysis of pre-sale in the
neighborhood and post sales in the neighborhood.
Both data indicate a good picture of re-use of properties, created properties on the tax roll, and
the sales analysis shows no negative effect on sales after the school closed and was re-used.
The three schools closed over the past decade have resulted in a positive re-use of the property.
Two of the new uses have resulted in the addition of new build residential property, providing
increases in the Taxable Assessed Value.
Jane Addams School; Sold in 2005
Property was bought by a developer and developed into a 29 lot subdivision. 24 of the lots have
been sold and new homes have been built. These are Ranch and two-story style homes. This has
added over $2.7million dollars in assessed value/or a full market value addition of $5.8 million.
This has added over $220,000 in taxes collected. The one time revenue to the school district was
$463,000.
Brighton School; Sold in 2009
Property was bought by Clover Management and developed into one of the finest Senior Citizen
Apartment complexes in WNY. It totals 153 units. This project was a successful adaptive re-use
and qualified for a PILOT with the ECIDA. The current assessed value is $4,291,650 or a full
market value of $9,130,000. In 2013/14 over $135,000 in taxes were collected, which will
increase over the next 7 years as the PILOT wears off. In 2019, when property is fully on rolls
the taxes collected will be over $400,000. The one time revenue to the district was $660,415.
Green Acres School; Closed 2012
Property was bought by Heritage Centers to house their operations. While property remains tax
exempt, School District gained $850,000 for sale of property. One other positive spin off was a
private developer purchased the former Heritage Center on Delaware Road. This added $660,000
in assessed valuation/$1,400,000 in full market value.
Net Gain of These Transactions
There was a net gain of $7.6 million in assessed value/$16.2 million in full market value, and all
to the taxable portion of roll. These properties as schools paid ZERO in taxes. These properties,
when fully taxable, will be paying over $700,000 in taxes. Two of the three re-uses resulted in
the ability to provide new housing for many Town residents as apartments or new homes.
18
SALES ANALYSIS
1. Brighton School Ranches 1/1/06-1/1/09 Ranches 6/30/06-6/30/12 Capes 1/1/06-1/1/09 Capes 6/30/06-6/30/12
Closed in 2009 Number of sales 15 18 Number of sales 23 22
Reviewed Sales on the Average Sales price per $95.58 $93.72 Average Sales price per $75.36 $83.18
following streets Square Foot Square Foot
MapleGrove/Melody
Fries/Treadwell Colonials 1/1/06-1/1/09 Colonials 6/30/06-6/30/12 Splits 1/1/06-1/1/09 Splits 6/30/06-6/30/12
Briarhurst/Calvin Ct Number of sales 8 1 Number of sales 2 8
Average Sales price per $83.25 $96.00 Average Sales price per $84.00 $85.77
Square Foot Square Foot
No major changes in Values

or Number Of Sales
Issue with sales from

2.Jane Addams 2003-2006
Closed in 2006 not in system
3. Green Acres School Ranches 1/1/09-12/30/11 Ranches 1/1/12-2/1/14 Capes 1/1/09/- 12/30/11 Capes 1/1/12-2/1/14
Closed in 2012 Number of sales 47 22 Number of sales 6 1
Reviewed Sales on the Average Sales price per $84.57 $86.50 Average Sales price per $75.36 $83.18
following streets Square Foot 36 months 25 months Square Foot 36 months 25 months
Glenalby/Pryor
Overbrook/Greenleaf Colonials Colonials splits splits
Fries/Avon Number of sales None None Number of sales none none
Average Sales price per $0.00 $0.00 Average Sales price per $0.00 $0.00
Square Foot Square Foot
No major changes in Values

or Number Of Sales
around either school
19
The Town of Tonawanda is currently revising its long term comprehensive plan. Clearly, that eventual plan
will reiterate the importance of the school district. The plan may also mention possible reuses of sold district
property such as appropriate senior housing and the building of newer, larger residential homes. The district
will have to consider, as it has in the past, the zoning restrictions of any school district properties to be sold.
The same consideration needs to be given to the Village of Kenmore (both zoning maps are included in the
appendix of this report. The village, in particular, voiced concern about any of its schools closing and recently
reiterated its zones. A core recommendation is to maintain some school district presence in the village and it
is suggested that the village collaborate where possible on the topic of reuse. The district is not an adversary of
the village, but the village must also realize that the health of the entire school district and community is at stake
in terms of sustainability. The district is willing to collaborate with the Village of Kenmore to enhance the
community should school building reuse or sale occur.
On the national level, many schools have been transformed into usable resources. The school district prefers to
collaborate with both communities for the betterment of all citizens regarding this topic.
20
8. Open Enrollment Implications
Our school district has had an Open Enrollment policy for a number of years now (BOE Policy 7140 Student
Transfers). This policy has afforded families an opportunity to apply to attend another school with the same
grade levels outside their own attendance zone. Parents have understood that transportation is their
responsibility for open enrollment, and furthermore, space in the receiving building must be available. In this
changed economy, some elementary schools, and to a lesser extent middle schools, have had to disapprove open
enrollment applications at certain grade levels as the district reduced staff and raised class section guidelines. If
the Board of Education approves one of the consolidation scenarios, it may want to consider temporarily
suspending open enrollment applications to ensure the savings enumerated in that same scenario are at least
realized first.
21
9. Deficient Building Conditions
SES Study Team (2013)

o District Estimated Cost of Future Capital Improvement Projects as of April 2013:
The SES Study Team worked with district staff to prepare a summary of what the 2010-2011 Building
Conditions Survey as items needing attention over the next five years. The summary also includes a perspective
of what items were addressed in the Capital Project approved by the voters. Finally, the summary gives a
snapshot estimate of the capital work that probably should be addressed and planned for in each of the school
buildings as of April 2013.
KENMORE-TOWN OF TONAWANDA SCHOOL TOTAL DISTRICT ESTIMATED COST GROSS BUILDING SQ FT

BUILDING OF FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT (AS PER 2010-11 BCS)
PROJECT (CIP)
^ KENMORE EAST HIGH SCHOOL $4,850,300 288,965
^ KENMORE WEST HIGH SCHOOL $4,118,700 282,662
^ HOOVER ELEMENTARY & MIDDLE SCHOOL $12,487,800 201,957
^ FRANKLIN ELEM & MIDDLE SCHOOL $9,383,721 176,085
KENMORE MIDDLE SCHOOL $3,081,000 176,145
EDISON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL $877,000 88,240
ROOSEVELT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL $1,176,000 70,988
LINDBERGH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL $3,477,000 81,885
HAMILTON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL $1,470,000 78,880
HOLMES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL $1,075,000 72,700
+SHERIDAN BUILDING $452,500 91,690
JEFFERSON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL N.A. 66,198
TOTAL COST OF ALL NAMED BUILDINGS $42,449,021 1,676,395
^ identified by District as cornerstone locations
+ estimated total cost to bring facility to full habitation
in its current condition
As weve seen, the condition of our buildings has deteriorated given their age. The districts current capital
project brought ADA compliance issue up to date and worked more on building envelope issues. These items
relate to roofs, leaking windows, fresh classroom air issues, and other items. However, although nearly six
years old, these figures on the next page indicate just how much work is needed in our buildings:
22
23
The approved bond for the ending Phase I Capital Project was 58.5 million dollars; a full 76.5 million dollars
beneath the outlaid work of 2008. A point of consideration for this reorganization project is it is imperative the
district initiates a Phase 2 Capital Project as soon as possible, and clearly, the more buildings we continue to
operate the more costly and challenging capital work will become. There are main deficiencies remaining in the
buildings to one degree or another and the reality is this must be considered in any serious reorganization
discussion.
24
10. Capital Debt Owed on District School Buildings
The Capital Debt owed on our school building (paid back over a long period of time) are as follows (December,
2013):
School Operating Capacity Operating Capacity Debt

Minimum Maximum
West 1938 2086 8,317,077
East 1613 1739 8,746,386
FMS 797 859 13,798,712
KMS 925 991 10,966,622
HMS 1149 1245 16,497,920
Hoover Elementary 608 658 X
Franklin Elementary 622 674 X
Lindbergh 547 579 1,343,948
Roosevelt 364 388 4,524,178
Hamilton 436 470 3,542,806
*Edison 462 498 442,868
*Jefferson X X 239,267
Holmes 348 376 5,322,693
* Could be sold for direct and immediate profit
Assistant Superintendent for Business, Mr. Gerry Stuitje, explains how Capital Debt is reconciled if a school
building is sold here:
The financial impact of selling a building will be discussed in three areas. The first is the requirements for
funding a debt service reserve, the second is the effect on the amortized state aid on projects for that building,
and the third is the ramifications regarding QZAB and other tax-exempt bond funding.
When a District sells a building with outstanding debt, it must set aside the proceeds to fund that debt up to the
outstanding balance. The funds are placed in the Debt Service Reserve and are allocated annually to pay for
the debt on the sold building. Therefore, if there was $2,000,000 in outstanding debt on a building and the
building was sold for $1,250,000, the whole purchase price would be placed in Debt Service Reserve. If the
numbers are reversed where there was $1,250,000 in outstanding debt on a building and the building was sold
for $2,000,000; $1,250,000 would be placed in Debt Service Reserve and $750,000 could be used for other
purposes such as one-time General Fund revenue or placed in the Capital Reserve.
Selling a building that is generating aid for a building project will also affect the Building Aid received. The
State will deduct the sale revenue from the remaining project balance and establish a new assumed
amortization for the remaining useful life of the project based on that adjusted balance. As an example, if a
building is being aided on a $5 million project and it is sold for $2 million, the aid would be adjusted for the
remainder of the project as if the project was for $3 million.
Finally, there are ramifications for the status of the QZABs and tax-exempt bonds when a building is sold.
Those obligations are issued on the assumption that the proceeds will be used for a particular "governmental"
purpose until the bonds are paid off. That assumption is correct as long as the building that has been improved
with bond proceeds is used by the District for traditional educational purposes. If the use of the building
changes due to sale or lease to a third party, the legal status for the tax-exempt status of the bonds may come
25
into question. The third party's occupation of the building can create so-called "private use" issues under the
Internal Revenue Code, or could be inconsistent with the legal representations that the District has made as
part of its QZAB financing. The result can be that the bonds no longer remain eligible for the tax-favored
treatment that the investors are counting on. However, there are some exceptions that may apply if the
percentage of the bond proceeds affected is relatively small. It may also be possible for some of the proceeds of
the sale to be placed into a restricted escrow account that will be used to redeem the "tainted" bonds when they
come due, and there are other possible remedies as well. Because the issues in this area are particularly
complex and fact-specific, it will be important for the District to collaborate with our bond counsel (Jeff Stone)
and our financial advisor (Rick Ganci) while any transaction is being developed and prior to the adoption of a
Board resolution and the signing of any contract.
It is important for the community, based on the complexities explained above, that simply the outstanding debt
owed alone was not the only consideration for school closing recommendations. The debt owed, immediate
sale profitability, representative ability to draw school age children, age and condition, geographic location,
building conditions, and relevant capital improvements were all aspects that were considered.
26
11. Solar and Wind Energy Enhancements
Gov. Cuomo Launches Solar Schools Program for NY

Governor Cuomo announced "K-Solar," a new solar schools program that will help put solar panels on schools
throughout New York. The program is the first of its kind and links community solar to solar schools in
innovative new ways. Governor Cuomo should be commended for his plan to bring solar powers many benefits
to schools and communities across New York.
According to 2014 State of the State address , K-Solar will include many aspects of recent, popular Solarize
campaigns developed to help communities overcome financial and logistical barriers to installing solar power,
leading customers through a simple process, from awareness to installation, in as little as six months. The key
aspect of Solarize for communities is that the more projects that happen through the campaign, the cheaper each
27
project is. K-Solar will add the wrinkle of providing greater incentives for the local school to go solar, the
greater the number of systems are installed in the surrounding community.
Solar power can reduce energy costs for our schools, provide healthier air for our kids to breathe, and serve as
teaching tools for science, technology, engineering and math, as indicated in a press release earlier this year:
NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) is eager to help the Governor and the state reach these goals.
Community-led outreach and education is an essential element of the Solarize approach and one that NRDC
views as vital to expanding the development of community solar projects and furthering the clean-energy
economy.
NRDC looks forward to exploring opportunities to advance the states program through the Solar
Schools platform we are developing now. It will help parents, teachers, students and community members
connect and organize around the development of specific solar projects. These projects will increase renewable
energy infrastructure in their neighborhoods, teach kids about the benefits of renewable energy, and, as
importantly, help cash-strapped schools save money on energy that they can put toward their core mission:
educating students. This platform will be a bridge that connects local enthusiasm for renewable energy with the
experts and resources school communities need to build the futures they want.
Additionally, a year ago the Board of Education heard a presentation from some of our own Project Lead the
Way Students on the subject of wind energy. The presentation was fascinating, and there is no question an
investigatory approach as to the possibility of wind aided energy production could prove viable for our school
district also.
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/35512.pdf
It is also interesting to note that the "traditional" wind turbine array is being replaced with structures more
pleasing to the eye:
28
12. Reconciliation of Unanswered SES Study Team Findings & Suggestions
The SES Study Team had made some observations for consideration:
1. Common Day Cycle: They had observed that our district may want to consider common day cycle
scheduling for like grade-configured schools. The concept would help achieve better utilization of shared staff
as well as having other benefits. This concept was investigated this year and recommendations were made. In
terms of the common day cycle suggestion, our district personnel found the following:
Current Scheduling Practices:

Elementary Monday Friday (not a cycle)
Middle Schools 2-day cycle (A/B)
High Schools 6-day cycle (1-6)
Concerns regarding the shared staff with the current mixed scheduling practices across the district:
Travel time takes away from what could be scheduled supervisory time
Course sections may be smaller or larger as a result of a shared teachers availability
Number of teacher preps may increase
Shared teachers are often not able to attend meetings for all of the buildings they serve
Shared teachers may not be available to offer after school remedial assistance or enrichment
Shared teachers are often not available to attend the Open Houses and conference nights for all of their
schools
Shared teachers struggle to participate in common planning time with their colleagues
Benefits of a common day cycle across the district:
If elementary joins in on a 6-day cycle, there may be an increase in instructional time for special areas
(currently Monday specials are adversely affected by the number of holidays)
Would allow for staggering early release and conference days; thereby, decreasing the negative impact
on the same course/special
Would allow for the days in the cycle to be printed on the district calendar for families to reference
Summary:
While the committee did not have enough information at hand to determine whether instituting a
common day cycle would directly reduce the number of shared staff in the district, there was consensus that it
would appear to offer more staffing flexibility and potentially increase the amount of instruction/remediation
our students receive. The middle schools would like to pursue a 6-day cycle for the 2014-15 school year. The
elementary schools are interested in obtaining more information on exactly how this would work at this level,
involving their colleagues and teachers in the process. The thoughts expressed included the possibility of
implementing a 6-day cycle in 2015-16.
Moreover, if two high schools remain after a possible reorganization, the Superintendent has urged both schools
to consider not only a same day cycle, but the same master bell schedule. While shared staff possibilities are
obvious, new thinking may help student and staff programming. For example, synchronized learning could take
place between the high school campuses through Skype or similar technology. In this example, all students, say
12 at East and 7 at West, are supervised in each classroom but at East the supervisor is a certified lead teacher
29
for both sections. The students and teachers from both sections participate in the class as if it were one physical
section, thus preserving, and possibly expanding, student opportunity.
Another possibility for consideration if future reorganization takes place and the district has larger elementary
schools, could be consideration of the Concept Progress Model. More and more is being asked of faculty
members and with heightened accountability and standards. This concept should at least be explored to see if
faculty members can take advantage of both their number and strengths through such a model or a similar
version of it:
This approach is another attempt to address students' differing needs for learning time (Canady and Rettig 1992,
Canady 1989). Several elementary and middle schools across the country are using it to provide mathematics
instruction to heterogeneous groups.
A Concept/Progress Middle School Model for a Six-Day Cycle with 50- to 60-Minute Periods per Day
1 2 3 4 5
Teachers Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 6 Monday
Math A Concept Math Concept Math Progress Math Progress Math Progress Math Progress Math
Groups 1 & 4 Groups 1 & 4 Group 1 Group 1 Group 4 Group 4
Math B Progress Math Progress Math Concept Math Concept Math Progress Math Progress Math
Group 2 Group 2 Groups 2 & 5 Groups 2 & 5 Group 5 Group 5
Math C Progress Math Progress Math Progress Math Progress Math Concept Math Concept Math
Group 3 Group 3 Group 6 Group 6 Groups 3 & 6 Groups 3 & 6
Computer Groups 5 & 6 Groups 5 & 6 Groups 3 & 4 Groups 3 & 4 Groups 1 & 2 Groups 1 & 2
Lab
Math teachers A, B, and C present the basic concepts of a mathematical topic to their entire classes two days of
every six-day cycle. Math Teacher A's Concept Math Group meets on Days 1 and 2 of the six-day cycle. During
concept math time, the teacher focuses on grade-level instruction, ideally using cooperative learning, providing
direct instruction, and, when needed, illustrating with manipulatives. The teacher does not test and grade
students in concept groups.
After working with their whole groups, Teachers A, B, and C divide students into two Progress Math Groups
temporary, flexible, homogeneous groupings of students, based on their understanding of the basic ideas taught
in the Concept Math Group. Math Teacher A instructs Progress Math Group 1 on Days 3 and 4, and Group 4 on
Days 5 and 6. (Note that Progress Math Groups 1 and 4 equal Teacher A's Concept Math Group.) Teachers
monitor and adjust instruction during this time, providing enrichment and additional assistance as needed;
30
however, Progress Math Groups remain on the same topic. For example, if teachers have planned to work on
long division for 18 days, Progress Math Group 2 might focus on dividing two digits into three digits, while
Progress Math Group 5 might be dividing three digits into four. Note, however, that all groups work in long
division for the number of days determined by the pacing guide that teachers developed at the beginning of the
school year. Students are graded based on their progress within the topic.
In the computer lab, similar adjustments are made in the selection of software for each group. The concept-
progress model is just one way of designing the school schedule to serve students with varying instructional
needs by providing whole-group instruction without the pressure of testing and grading; small groups so that
teachers can monitor and adjust instruction without having to teach one group while policing another group; and
both extended learning and enrichment time on an individual student basis.
2. Sample Current Instructional Support Spaces that may be able to be deployed as Direct Instruction
Classrooms (SES Study Team 2013)
School Room Square In 2012-2013, the room use is: Additional Pupil
Footage Capacity if the
instructional support
space is reassigned to
shared or other
smaller spaces if
appropriate.
Edison 102 780 ESL 18 - 28
Elementary 106 780 Math Academic Intervention/Gifted and Talented 18 - 28
122 840 Occupational Therapy/Physical Therapy 18 - 28
208 840 Special Ed. Resource 18 - 28
Franklin 218 880 Reading Room 18 - 28

Elementary 217 729 Special Ed. Resource 18 - 25
157 771 Conference Room 18 - 28
Hamilton 109 794 Reading Room 18 - 28

Elementary 203 801 Occupational Therapy/Physical Therapy 18 - 28
132 820 Multi-Purpose Instruction Room 18 - 28
110 794 Intervention/Conference Room 18 - 28
Holmes 209 792 Reading Academic Intervention 18 - 28

Elementary 114 791 Reading Room 18 - 28
Hoover 247 768 Math Academic Intervention/Gifted and Talented 18 - 28

Elementary 212 816 Remedial Rooms 18 - 28
117 1068 Remedial Rooms 18 - 28
343 768 Remedial Math 18 - 28
104 801 Reading Room 18 - 28
209 912 Counselor 18 - 28
Lindbergh 202 726 Math Academic Intervention/Gifted and Talented 18 - 25

Elementary
31
Roosevelt 212 753 Remedial Rooms 18 - 26

Elementary 130 778 Reading Academic Intervention 18 - 28
218 716 Reading Room 18 - 25
226 719 Reading Room 18 - 25
Estimated Potential Added Elementary Building Pupil Capacity if Needed: 50%
times 540 to 824: 270 to 412
School Room Square In 2012-2013, the room use is: Additional Pupil
Footage Capacity if the
instructional support
space is reassigned to
shared or other smaller
spaces if appropriate.
Kenmore 201 629 Special Ed Co-Teacher 26 - 28
Middle 306 650 Special Ed Co-Teacher 26 - 28
326 616 Special Ed Co-Teacher 26 - 28
Hoover 206 943 Student Support Room 26 - 28

Middle 103 720 In School Suspension 26 - 28
226 928 BOCES Speech Room 26 - 28
246 768 Math AIS 26 - 28
375 1080 Math AIS 26 - 28
228 900 Reading AIS 26 - 28
241 768 Reading AIS 26 - 28
378 1180 ELA AIS 26 - 28
Franklin 151 788 In School Suspension 26 - 28

Middle 257 784 Physical Therapy/Occupational Therapy 26 - 28
262 786 ESL 26 - 28
357 782 AIS Services 26 - 28
290 1262 ELA AIS 26 - 28
Estimated Potential Added Middle School Building Pupil Capacity if Needed:

50% times 754 to 812: 377 to 406
Kenmore 235 1064 Learning Center AIS 27 - 29
East HS 163 775 LOTE (ESL) 27 - 29
212 780 Resource Room 27 - 29
116 780 In School Suspension 27 - 29
Kenmore 309 1647 Academic Achievement Center 27 - 29

32
West HS 325 825 ESL 27 - 29
Estimated Potential Added High School Building Pupil Capacity if Needed:

50% times 216 to 232: 108 116
School district personnel updated these charts this school year and met with individual schools to discuss the
feasibility of converting some spaces back to full time instructional use. The Director of Special Education and
Superintendent visited schools for this discussion.
In this final consolidation for scenario analysis project we suggested using up to 50% of these spaces; however,
it was not necessary. This provides another future seat capacity cushion for the district.
3. SES Study Team (2013) Class Size Equity

Given that there are eight (seven for 2013-2014) elementary attendance zones with no guarantee of
pupil cohort populations at a particular grade level, the district is achieving equity of class sizes within
grade levels within each building. However, there are some large equity gaps in grade level class
section sizes between and among the elementary school buildings and the attendance zones they serve.
The grade level section equity gaps are not a result of poor resource allocation or class section
assignment. Rather, the gaps occur simply because of the number of pupils available at a particular
grade level that live within the various elementary attendance zones. Only the district can judge what
is an acceptable difference in average grade level class sizes between and among the elementary
schools.
In 2012-2013, the equity gaps between the lowest and highest grade level section class sizes among the
elementary buildings for grades kindergarten through grade five range from 5 pupils to 9 pupils. Are
there grade level configurations and/or attendance zone changes that might reduce the equity gaps in
average grade level section sizes between and among the elementary school buildings?
Grade Two Class Size Jefferson lowest Holmes highest 36% difference highest average building grade
Equity Gap: average at average at 2 class size to the lowest average building
9 pupils 16 25 grade 2 class size
Grade Four Class Size Hamilton lowest Holmes highest 32.1% difference highest average building
Equity Gap: average at average at grade 4 class size to the lowest average
8.5 pupils 18 26.5 building grade 4 class size
Grade One Class Size Roosevelt lowest Hoover highest 34% difference highest average building grade
Equity Gap: average at average at 1 class size to the lowest average building
8.1 pupils 15.7 23.8 grade 1 class size
Grade Three Class Size Hamilton lowest Roosevelt 30.6% difference highest average building
Equity Gap: average at highest average grade 3 class size to the lowest average
7.8 pupils 17.7 at 25.5 building grade 3 class size
Grade Five Class Size Lindbergh Hoover highest 26.2% difference highest average building
Equity Gap: lowest average at average at grade 5 class size to the lowest average
7.2 pupils; 20.3 27.5 building grade 5 class size
Kindergarten Class Size Edison lowest Franklin highest 22.7% difference highest average building
Equity Gap: average at average at Kindergarten class size to the lowest average
5 pupils 17 22 building Kindergarten class size
Generally, we believe in our final analysis that the equity gap is lessened in scenarios that tend to cluster
larger same grade students, in addition to lessening the amount of schools.
33
13. Shared Staff Real Cost Savings from SES Findings
Distance Between Buildings (SES Study Team 2013)
.
EDISON FRANKLIN HAMILTON HOLMES HOOVER LINDBERGH ROOSEVELT KENMORE KENMORE
BUILDING BUILDING MS WEST HS
KENMORE
EAST
HS 1 1.5 2 4.5 2.5 3 5 3.5 3
KENMORE
WEST HS 2.25 2.25 2.75 2 .75 1.5 1.5 .05
KENMORE
MS 2.75 2.75 3.25 2.25 1.25 .75 .75
ROOSEVELT 3.75 3.5 4.25 1.5 2.25 1.5
LINDBERGH 2 2 4.25 2 2.75
HOOVER
BUILDING 2 2.25 2 2.25
HOLMES 3.75 4.75 4.25
HAMILTON
.75 2.5
FRANKLIN
BUILDING 1.75
The chart above directly impacts the cost of shared staff. A general analysis of shared staff impact is
conservatively estimated in the scenario cost benefit analysis as many factors affect shared staffing. The 2013
shared staff SES Study Team Chart was updated for this school year:
34
o Shared Staffing Among the School Buildings (full time equivalents): as of 2/25/2014
SCHOOL ED FRANK HAM HOLMES HOOVER LIND ROOSE KEN FRANK HOOVER KEN KEN Sheridan
EL EL MID MID MID WEST EAST /Other
SHARED POSITION FULL TIME EQUIVALENT
Art .2 .8
Art .2 .2
Art .8 .2
Art .3 .4 .3
Teacher of the Blind 1.0 District-wide share as needed.
Business .8 .2
Counselor .8 .2
Teacher of the Deaf 1.0 District-wide share as needed.
Elementary .5 .5
English .6 .4
English (PT) .2 .4
Eng. as a Second Lang. .5 .5
Eng. as a Second Lang. .5 .5
Eng. as a Second Lang. .5 District-wide as needed .5
Eng. as a Second Lang. .6 .4 District-wide as needed
Eng. as a Second Lang. .3 District-wide as needed .7
Family and CS .5 .5
Family and CS .3 .7
Family and CS .2 .8
French .4 .4 .2
German .4 .4 .2
German .8 .2
German PT .6 .2
Gifted and Talented .2 .2 .2 .2 .2
Gifted and AIS Math .4 .3 .3
Health .8 .2
LMS .5 .5
35
SCHOOL ED FRANK HAM HOLMES HOOVER LIND ROOSE KEN FRANK HOOVER KEN KEN Sheridan/
EL EL MID MID MID WEST EAST Other
SHARED FULL TIME EQUIVALENT
POSITION
LMS .8 .2
Math (CLS) .4 .2
Math .8 .2
Math .2 .8
Math .5 .5
Music .5 .1 .4
Music .4 .6
Music .4 .6
Music .5 .5
Music .6 .4
Music .6 .4
Music (CLS) .2 .2 .2
Music .7 .3
Music .2 .8
Music .5 .5
Music .4 .1 .5
Phys Ed. .2 .8
Phys Ed. .5 .5 District-wide Adaptive PE
Phys Ed. .6 + .2 .2
APE
Phys Ed. .6 .4
Psychologist .6 .4
Psychologist .1 .9
Psychologist .7 .3
Psychologist .7 .3
Psychologist .8 .2
Reading .5 .5
Reading .5 .5
Reading .5 .5
Reading .5 .5
Science .2 .4 .4
Science .2 .8
Science .4 .6
36
SCHOOL ED FRANK HAM HOLMES HOOVER LIND ROOSE KEN FRANK HOOVER KEN KEN Sheridan/
EL EL MID MID MID WEST EAST Other
SHARED FULL TIME EQUIVALENT
POSITION
Social Studies .4 .6
Spanish .4 .6
Special Ed. .5 District-Wide .5
Special Ed. PT .4 .4
Special Ed. PT .5 .4 St Johns
Speech .7 .3
Speech .6 .4
Speech .9 .1 St. Johns
Speech .4 .6
Speech .4 .6
Speech .3 .5 .2 St. Andrews
Technology .1 .9
Technology .6 .4
Social Worker .5 .5
Social Worker .4 .5 .1
Vision 1.0 District-wide share as needed.
4.9 Total District --wide
TOTALS: 4.4 5.0 3.3 5.4 4.5 2.8 6.7 5.4 9.2 5.9 6.0 6.3 2.6
84.9 Full Time equivalent instructional staff are shared among the schools in 2012-2013
72.4 FTE instructional staff are shared among the schools in 2013-14
The closing of a school (Jefferson Elementary School) and other factors led to a 15% reduction in shared staffing this school year.
Updated 2/25/14
37
The district shares instructional staff members among the school buildings to help ensure equitable
service to the pupils in all the buildings. One element that hinders the efficiency of sharing staff
between and among non-adjacent school buildings in one day is that 30 minutes of travel time
between assignments in non-adjacent buildings must be scheduled for each shared teacher as per the
teachers contract.
About 5.4 full time equivalent teachers worth of time is necessary to meet the 30 minute allocated
travel requirement to implement the extensive curriculum delivery efficient practice of sharing
about 90 specialty teachers among buildings. At Ken-Ton 5.4 FTE instructional staff on-average
costs about $538,000. Proportionally, the reduction of shared staff use this year compared with last is
$80,700.00 of staff FTE.
Are there grade level configuration and building use options that might be able to support the
delivery of all aspects of the curriculum in an equitable manner and in a manner that reduces the
implementation cost to share staff between and among school buildings? The answer is yes but it
may vary according to each scenario.
38
14. Faculty, BOE Member, and Parental Input regarding Two Unique Programs
The concepts of a grades 7-12 Junior-Senior High School and establishing a Themed School of application
choice are new concepts for our school district. They are mentioned for consideration now because
reorganization may free up space and resources to create them.
A. Grades 7-12 Junior-Senior High School Configuration
Although not in the districts past, this grade 7-12 configuration is somewhat prevalent throughout New
York State. (In those districts, sometimes the schools were designed that way, other times they were changed
to accommodate the configuration.) All configurations, as we have seen, have advantages and disadvantages,
and the 7-12 configuration should not be discounted as a viable model. There are school districts in our state
with similar demographics to ours and the schools are doing well, and, in some cases, outperforming us.
It is more than possible to largely separate grades 7/8 from 9/12 in these configurations, and doing this
project a group of parents, faculty members, and Board of Education members met and deliberated upon the
challenges and opportunities of this configuration and their notes follow. Mentioned field trips to some
actual 7-12 schools did not take place due to time constraints; however, such trips could and should be
scheduled if this configuration is chosen.
7-12 Junior-Senior High School Meeting

Monday, February 10, 2014
OPPORTUNITIES
More programs (IB, etc.)
Fewer traveling teachers
Students can excel in sports
Better, more mentoring programs
Closer to school
Keeping same friends/no splitting up
Keep more kids in district
Teams back in the middle schools
Guidance Counselors having long relationships w/students
One building better for parents, especially w/multiple kids
Flexibility w/staff
Better parent involvement
Built in feeder for extra curricular
Maintain 2 high schools
1 transition instead of 2 or 3
39
STEM more chances to advance (i.e., Advanced Regents)

More compatible for maturity levels
Use this opportunity to switch bell schedules
Cost reduction busses, sharing supplies, resources, etc.
Bring back intermural activities
Services (Special Ed) more condensed more staff
Student pride
Longer relationships between student/teacher
Better levels for sports modified JV Varsity
More opportunities for kids to be active
More community involvement
More effective fundraisers
Stronger PTA & HSA
CHALLENGES
Mixing 7th-8th graders with high school developmental issues, maturity
Finding a way to segregate younger/older students
Transportation students all on one bus?
Physical education classes together?
Physical configuration of building; remodeling needed cost?
Would staff be dedicated to one grade only?
Scheduling
Less opportunities for: sports, music, theater, other co/extra-curricular
Physical space limitations for above
Kids getting lost in the shuffle
Accessibility to facilities for practices
Building capacity? 95% full
What are we doing with middle & elementary buildings?
Parking for events
Loss of instructional time/teacher transitions, traveling & sharing classrooms
Safety in parking lots
40
Some Junior-Senior High School

Grades 7-12 Examples in
New York State
February, 2014
Elmont Memorial Junior Senior High School
Elmont Memorial Junior-Senior High School (EMHS) is a co-educational, secondary public high school
founded in 1956 for students in grades 7-12 in the hamlet of Elmont, Long Island, New York, in Nassau
County.
Its street address is 555 Ridge Road, Elmont, New York 11003.
The school has an enrollment of 1,907 students and 120.0 classroom teachers (on a FTE basis, for a student-
teacher ratio of 18.3.[1]
Its school newspaper is known as the Elmont Phoenix". Elmont High School's mascot is the Spartan. Its
school colors are green and white. The school's current principal is John Capozzi. Elmont High School is
part of the Sewanhaka Central High School District.
Awards and recognition

During the 199093 school year, Elmont Memorial High School was recognized with the Blue Ribbon
School Award of Excellence by the United States Department of Education,[2] the highest award an
American school can receive.[3][4]
In 2005, Elmont High School was recognized as having the largest number of African American high school
students scoring a 3 or higher on Advanced Placement examinations in the country.
Elmont HS was also recognized by the College Board as having the largest number of African American
students attaining a 3 or higher on the Advanced Placement U.S. History exam in the country.[5]
Another prestigious honor Elmont Memorial has received is having an average from 19952006 of having a
97% graduation rate, and in 2004 achieved a 100% graduation rate. A first in the Sewanhaka Central District.
Academics
Levels of Study
Students may pursue one of two levels of study:
Advanced-This is an accelerated program of instruction designed only for students of superior ability,
strong motivation, and sustained interest. Students are expected to maintain an average of at least
85% to continue to the next advanced course in the sequence.
41
Regents-Students pursue courses in which the curriculum is prescribed by the New York State
Department of Education.
Grades 7 and 8
Students are organized into "Teams" this year including the Lions (Regular), Hurricanes (Regular),
and the Wolverines (Advanced) composed of students and core teachers in math, science, English,
and social studies. This allows for the individual attention necessary for success at an early stage in
secondary education.
During the Junior High School years, students further the learning skills developed during the
elementary school years, as well as preparing students for the high school curriculum as well as
vocational possibilities. Students pursue studies in English, Social Studies, Mathematics, Science,
Foreign Languages, Music, Physical Education, Art, Technology, Family and Consumer Sciences,
Health Education, and Language Enrichment. *High School credit is awarded to 8th graders that
pursue advanced coursework in science, mathematics, foreign language, and music.
Teams include Advanced and Regular students. Advanced students are a separate team all by
themselves, but since the Regular Team is so large, it is divided into two separate teams based on
your last name.
Grades 9-12
During the High School years, students pursue coursework required to receive the High School
Diploma. Students may receive either a Regents Diploma or Advanced Regents Diploma upon
graduation. Coursework is designed to fulfill requirements necessary for students interested in
attending two-year colleges, four-year colleges, vocational schools, nursing programs, etc.
Another similar community demographic is in Cortland, NY:
Cortland Junior Senior High School

Every student will graduate prepared to continue his or her education, begin a career and become a
contributing member of our global society.
Welcome to the Cortland Junior Senior High School website! We are a school community committed to the
individual success of each student. To this end we provide a challenging and engaging curriculum, as well
as a broad program of co-curricular activities. Through academics, student activities, and athletics we
strive to provide all students with multiple opportunities to develop abilities, express talents, exercise
responsibility, and value learning.
The focus of the Cortland Family continues to be on teaching and learning. We are pleased, as members of
this staff, to have the opportunity to serve and work with your children. It is our privilege and challenge as
educators to strive continually to provide quality teaching in our classrooms. We thank you for your
continued support.
42
Note that this Junior High School within the larger 7-12 campus has its own principal and the faculty is
actually organized in teams with common planning periods.
Read the latest issue of the junior high online newspaper:

The PAW Print
TEAM 1
TEAM 2
TEAM 3
TEAM 4
Purple
Multimedia Central
PAW
43
Research Supporting a 7-12 School Configuration (Research from Oklahoma City Schools)
Minimizing Transitions to Improve Academic Achievement:
A transition from one school to another brings a different facility, unfamiliar teachers and administrators,
new groups of friendships and classmates, as well as different expectations. As detailed below, research
reveals that school-to-school transitions negatively impact academic achievement. The fewer transitions, the
better chance a student has of completing high school. If there is a transition into a new school for high
school instruction, however, grade 7 is preferable to transitioning in later years. Schools with more grades,
and fewer students per grade, are also related to improvements in academic achievement and the dropout
rate.
There is a decline in achievement during a students transition year from elementary school to the next level.
As the number of transitions experienced by a student increases, so does the high school dropout rate.
Further, the higher the transition grade level (the later the student transitions into the high school), the
higher the dropout rate, most significantly for boys. Specifically, of the high school configurations studied
(7-12, 9-12, and 10-12), the lowest high school dropout rates were seen in high schools where students
transitioned in at grade 7. The highest dropout levels were seen in 10-12 grade high schools. Alspaugh
suggests that the link between higher dropout rates and later-grade transition years is most likely attributed
to the academic achievement loss commonly experienced during the transition year and the fact that students
transitioning at grade 7, as opposed to grade 9 or 10, have more time to acclimate to high school. In
addition, he notes that schools with more grades (i.e., 7-12 schools) are usually smaller schools with fewer
students per grade. Smaller high schools typically have lower dropout rates than larger schools.
Consequently, his findings also supported previous research that with regard to minimizing dropout rates, it
is optimal to structure schools with more grades and fewer students per grade. (Alspaugh, J. W. (1999).
The interaction effect of transition grade to high school with gender and grade level upon dropout rates. (ED
431066). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association);
(Alspaugh, J. W. and Harting R. D. (1995). Transition effects of school grade-level organization on student
achievement. Journal of Research and Development in Education. 28(3), 145-49).
In a study of eight different schools with seven different grade spans, researchers found that sixth-grade
students in both elementary and combination K-12 schools outperformed sixth graders in middle schools or
junior high schools and considered the number of transitions a significant factor. (Paglin, Catherine, &
Fager, Jennifer. (1997). Grade configuration: Who goes where. Northwest Regional Educational
Laboratory. http://educationnorthwest.org/webfm_send/464).
A 2003 study of 232 schools in Michigan revealed that the reduction of school-to-school transitions is
correlated with improvements in student achievement and that longer grade spans within schools is
positively correlated with student achievement. The number of transitions was a significant predictor of
student achievement. The study evaluated student performance on the state assessment administered in
grades 4, 5, 7, 8 and 11. (Wren, Stephanie (2003). The Effect of Grade Span Configuration and School to
School Transition on Student Achievement). ED479332. 2003. http://www.eric.ed.gov).
44
A researcher from Johns Hopkins revealed in a 1987 study that the positive impact of longer grade spans in
schools teaching sixth graders was an advantage most evident among students of lower socio-economic
status. (Becker, H. J. (1987). Addressing the needs of different groups of early adolescents: Effects of
varying school and classroom organizational practices on students from different social backgrounds and
abilities. Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Dept. of Education).
Some studies have found that schools with more grade levels per building (i.e., fewer number of transitions)
evidenced not only higher academic achievement, but also better attendance rates, self-esteem and attitudes
towards school, with fewer suspensions and behavior problems, regardless of socioeconomic status
(Alspaugh, supra) (Offenberg, R.M. (2001). The efficacy of Philadelphias K-to-8 schools compared to
middle grades schools. Middle School Journal, 35(1)).
A 1997 study of Connecticut elementary and middle schools found that sixth graders performed better on
standardized tests when they were in K-6 configurations, as opposed to 6-8 middle school configurations.
The researchers also determined that a K-6 configuration led to greater school accountability for sixth
grade performance than that occurring in a 6-8th grade configuration. (Tucker, Charlene G., and Andrada,
Gilbert N (1997). Accountability Works: Analysis of Performance by Grade Span of School. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. ED 411 278.
http://www.eric.ed.gov ).
Other Benefits of the PK-6/7-12 Grade Configuration:
In elementary schools, student environment is more nurturing with fewer stressors than a middle school.
The stressors of a middle or high schoolnavigating through the school, forming peer relations,
organizational instructional adjustmentsare so critical that they neutralize or even diminish the
achievement gains made in elementary school. (Wren, supra ).
Schools with a broad span of grade levels present opportunities that do not exist in middle schools. There is
more opportunity for cross-age activities such as tutoring and older role model programs like kindergarten
buddies. Parents are more involved in a school in which their children are more likely to be in the same
building. (Paglin & Fager, supra).
The shift to longer grade span elementary schools allows students to stay in their neighborhood schools for a
longer period of time. (George, P.S. (2005). K-8 or Not? Reconfiguring the Middle Grades. Middle School
Journal. 37(1)).
Having schools with longer grade spans allow for more collaboration among teachers across grade levels as
well as better alignment of curriculum across grades. With regard to a K-7 school, it can become a place
where subject matter depth and expertise is more highly valued and leveraged than before the
reconfiguration, and its secondary students and teachers can benefit from the whole child perspective of
education more commonly found in elementary schools. (George, supra).
The concept of a themed school was brought to the districts attention during one of our public forums. At
the time, the term magnet school was used. Magnet schools were originally designed and funded as part of
our nations post 1964 desegregation efforts. The idea was to attract more majority students to schools that
were attended by mostly minority students. Extra funding was offered, and the school districts that chose
this option, or had it imposed upon them, went through a planning process. Some magnet schools were
successful, some were not, and the program waned over time.
45
Magnet schools and funding, however, were mentioned again as part of the 2004 No Child Left Behind act
and legislation. An official federal education office resource regarding magnet schools with more modern
examples is at this link:
https://www2.ed.gov/admins/comm/choice/magnet/report.pdf
Another interested group of parents, faculty, and Board of Education members convened to discuss the
challenges and opportunities of what ended up being called a Themed school as opposed to a Magnet
school. Basically, such a themed school would be open for all relevant grade levels of students to apply, and
transportation would be offered under the current mileage eligibility standards. The findings of that group
are here:
Themed Elementary School Meeting

Thursday, February 13, 2014
OPPORTUNITIES
Children will be more engaged
More parental support
Staffing; can be energizing
Establishing high standards at early age
Like minds together = amazing results
Unique opportunity
SDC can facilitate training
We have the space to accomplish
Long tradition of willing participants
Something positive!
Draw students in from non-public
Could be a better fit for some children
Funding (grant) may be available
CHALLENGES
Covering CCLS and layering themed school on top
How are specials affected?
Mixture of students with different abilities
Parental support may not be there for some children
Would children be categorized too early to track needs to be flexible?
Public perception of a themed school
46
WHAT THEMES ARE WE CONSIDERING?

Combined with consolidation at same time may be difficult
Staffing issues; finding right match
Tracking
Communication of schools mission to parents
What happens after themed elementary?
The themed school of suggestion are both Primary and Middle Year Baccalaureate Programmes. As weve
seen, both high schools already have viable diploma programmes and our first graduating class to obtain this
additional credential was within the June 2013 Kenmore West graduating class. The results of those initial
graduates outperformed the global average and the community has remarked upon the program positively.
One of the elements heard throughout this project was educational program support and enhancement for
students. Saving costs through reorganization may afford such educational enhancements and one scenario
in particular (J) includes themed schools as an option for all families district wide to apply to grades 4-6.
Information regarding the primary and middle years IB programmes is included here:
This is one school districts indication of an IB themed school:
International Baccalaureate Primary Years Programme

The IB Primary Years Programme (PYP) at Bess Streeter Aldrich Elementary School is designed for students
in grades Kindergarten through fifth grade. It focuses on the development of the whole child as an inquirer,
both in the classroom and in the world outside. It is a framework guided by six trans-disciplinary themes of
global significance. Each theme is explored using knowledge and skills derived from six subject areas, with a
powerful emphasis on inquiry-based learning. The PYP is a uniquely international program focusing on the
total growth of the developing child. It includes the social, physical, emotional and cultural needs in addition
to academics. This is illustrated in the diagram below.
The International Baccalaureate Primary Years Programme (IBPYP) provides a shared curriculum for
primary schools throughout the world. It does not replace the district scope and sequence or the state
requirements, but expands on them providing breadth and depth to understanding for primary age children.
In addition, it provides the students with an international perspective that relates their world in the U.S. and
Nebraska to a larger global community. The curriculum is designed as an interactive whole that eventually
encompasses the full range of disciplines and adds to the district and state guidelines.
For more information contact:

Dr. Susie Melliger - Principal - 715-2020
Mrs. Sharon Epstein-IB Coordinator -715-2020
www.mpsomaha.org/aldrich
47
Mini magnet program at Millard Public Schools, Nebraska:
International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme

The IBO's Middle Years Programme (MYP) provides a framework of academic challenge and life skills for
students aged 11-16 years. The five-year programme offers an educational approach that embraces yet
transcends traditional school subjects.
The MYP is:

for students aged 11 to 16 or in grades 6-10.
a framework of academic challenge
8 subject groups, plus personal project in the final year
The MYP encourages students to:

understand the connections between subjects through interdisciplinary learning
understand the connections between subjects and the real world
become critical and reflective thinkers
In Millard, the MYP program is designed so that the Millard curriculum is taught using MYP strategies. The
MYP has subject-specific aims and there is subject content in the eight subject groups. The focus is on
internationalism and a more application-based approach to subjects.
Students are taught through the lenses of the five areas of interaction. This is illustrated by means of an
octagon with the five areas of interaction at its center.
For more information contact:

Grades 6-8
Dr. Joan Wilson - Principal - 715-1280
Mr. Scott Ingwerson - Assistant Principal and IB Coordinator-715-1280
www.mpsomaha.org/nms
Grades 9 and 10
Ms. Amber Ripa - IB Coordinator for MYP at Millard North High School
Mr. Brian Begley - Principal 715-1365
Mr. Bill Jelkin - Assistant Principal & Registrar 715-1219
www.mpsomaha.org/mnhs/academics/IB/introduction.htm
Some primary and middle years IB information is included here: www.ibo.org
(It may be possible to use the management efficiency grant for training and expenses)
48
The IB Primary Years Programme (PYP) is a curriculum framework designed for students aged 3 to 12. It
focuses on the development of the whole child as an inquirer, both in the classroom and in the world outside.
It is defined by six transdisciplinary themes of global significance, explored using knowledge and skills
derived from six subject areas, with a powerful emphasis on inquiry-based learning.
The PYP is flexible enough to accommodate the demands of most national or local curriculums and provides
the best preparation for students to engage in the IB Middle Years Programme.
49
The IB Middle Years Programme consists of eight subject groups integrated through five areas of interaction
providing global contexts for learning.
Students are required to study at least two languages (as part of their multilingual profile), humanities,
sciences, mathematics, arts, physical education and technology. In their final year, students will also
undertake an independent personal project to demonstrate the development of their skills and
understanding.
50
IB Diploma Programme students must choose one subject from each of five groups (1 to 5), ensuring breadth
of knowledge and understanding in their best language, additional language(s), the social sciences, the
experimental sciences and mathematics. Student may choose either an arts subject from group 6, or a second
subject from groups 1 to 5.
At least three and not more than four subjects are taken at higher level (240 teaching hours), while the other
subjects are taken at standard level (150 teaching hours). Students can study and take examinations, in
English, French or Spanish.
In addition to disciplinary and interdisciplinary study, the Diploma Programme features three core elements
that broaden students educational experience and challenge them to apply their knowledge and skills.
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
At one point during the project the idea of creating another themed school at Holmes Elementary School was
discussed (see core scenario recommendations to understand why.) As the project unfolded it became
difficult to free a number of application seats; however, the facility has expressed interest in continuing that
facilities conversation in considering an Expeditionary Learning School. Such a school was mentioned in
President Obamas 2014 State of the Union Address. Basic learning design principles are included on the
following pages.
Link to more advanced information is www.elschools.org

66
67
68
15. School District Reserves and General Fund Balance Usage
There continues to be questions regarding our school districts fund balance and reserve use. District fund
balance and reserves are regulated by the government or education law.
School districts in NYS are allowed to save up to 4% of their annual budget as unappropriated fund
balance. This fund balance is a savings account safety net for a school district. Generally, we are able to
maintain this allowable amount on an annual basis.
For many years, the district has also carried a large appropriated fund balance. This is use of fund balance in
the budget for a specific purpose, usually related to keeping the tax levy lower. The challenge here is the
district must save that amount the following year or increase or create the budget gap. To take this use down
the district must reduce equally between the revenue and expense side of the budget.
We have had an advanced five year financial plan for a number of years now, and the plan is updated on an
annual basis. The following graph indicates our total historical reserve amounts and use. GF stands for
general fund availability, and FB stands for fund balance. You can see that the district has been spending
down its reserves, and projects to continue to spend them down. We have already spent 46% of them.
69
It is important to understand that because the term reserves and fund balance are used does not
necessarily mean that a school district has free reign over these monies for general fund use, as previously
explained. An option the school district has could be even more or the same annual reserve and fund balance
use knowing that reorganization is approaching and THEN, perhaps, start a reorganization or consolidation
project. The concept behind this project is to see if better utilization of our buildings can help us financially
and programmatically before we get to an even larger state of emergency. As other parts of this report have
shown, the district should be better utilizing its buildings in good and poor financial times, and the reality is
all our reserves in real dollars could not even cover our project improvements if we in fact could spend them
on just that portion of our operations.
We have heard the statement that it seems that our annual budgets should be closer to the previous years
actual total expenditures, and the fact is we have improved that metric over the past seven years. However, it
is also important to know all of the moving parts of reserves and fund balances, what they achieve for the
school district, how which ones can be taken down without harming student programs, and how they are
actually a part of the school district budget and therefore its planning process.
A suggested positive goal would be to use our buildings in an improved utilization, feather down our annual
reserve use dependence (as our five year financial plan is trying to do), and maintain our 4% fund balance
allowed by regulations and law, and budget no more than around five million dollars annually for
appropriated use.
70
16. Why Mid to Long Range Sustainability is Jeopardized in our School District
One of the unfortunate outcomes of the great recession is that our nations spending per student has fallen for
the first time ever:
On the state level, despite what weve been led to believe, our state is not one of the best recovered states
compared to the nation:
71
Our school districts combined wealth ratio, defined by the state as a districts ability to pay for its education,
has drastically fallen as this chart indicates:
As our ability to afford education has drastically reduced, our expenditures have drastically increased.
Note that while our salaries are in the top 27% of the state, the states combined wealth ratio (CWR) average
metric for all districts is 1.0. Our CWR has fallen through the bottom half, and beyond, of that very
important metric. Bear in mind the Taxes, Taxes, Taxes portion of this report as well.
Closer to home, our school districts salary structures represent some of the highest in the area, and this
source lists our teacher salaries as second highest in the area and 208 out of 747 statewide, or the top 27%.
The district and community has always supported paying our teachers well, as it should have. The
presenting issue now is that the communitys ability to support such salary scales is more of a financial stress
than ever, and this impacts our ability to fund programs.
Rank in New
District County 5th percentile Median 95th percentile York state
Sweet Home Erie $51,320 $78,344 $99,718 177
Kenmore-Tonawanda Erie $51,681 $74,800 $90,477 208
Williamsville Erie $48,250 $73,000 $90,913 214
Cheektowaga-Sloan Erie $43,595 $70,623 $91,716 227
Grand Island Erie $44,043 $68,219 $94,125 242
Orchard Park Erie $41,400 $68,136 $93,888 243
West Seneca Erie $49,617 $67,790 $86,775 248
Akron Erie $48,875 $64,100 $89,334 272
Cheektowaga- Erie $39,162 $62,694 $92,322 283
Maryvale
Evans-Brant (Lake Erie $44,160 $62,638 $93,000 284
Shore)
Clarence Erie $45,756 $62,374 $92,683 288
Alden Erie $43,096 $60,656 $88,750 315
Springville-Griffith Erie $42,871 $60,491 $87,111 322
Inst
72
Amherst Erie $38,187 $58,670 $91,421 361

Erie 2-Chautauqua- Erie $35,590 $58,650 $85,144 363
Cattaraugus Boces
Iroquois Erie $44,750 $58,500 $91,950 364
East Aurora Erie $42,732 $57,725 $85,484 387
Frontier Erie $43,809 $57,580 $88,570 391
Erie 1 Boces Erie $41,144 $56,171 $84,611 420
Eden Erie $39,588 $56,150 $84,075 421
Tonawanda City Erie $39,433 $55,902 $78,612 427
Hamburg Erie $41,200 $55,625 $85,360 441
Cleveland Hill Erie $39,130 $53,871 $83,091 482
Lancaster Erie $41,658 $53,514 $89,280 490
Cheektowaga Erie $40,650 $52,375 $86,732 521
Holland Erie $37,958 $52,215 $83,500 525
Buffalo City Erie 676
Depew Erie 677
Hopevale At Hamburg Erie 678
Lackawanna City Erie 679
North Collins Erie 680
Our second largest union, the KTSEA, is currently renegotiating a new contract with the district so details
are not mentioned here, but for comparison purposes, most titles in that contract salary wise are also towards
the top when compared with other districts.
73% of our expenditure dollars are spent on salary and benefits because we are a school district. Both the
district and community, however, must understand that we have become best paid and our ability to pay
has lessened greatly over the past 15 years. This fact has become a sustainability issue for the school district.
An effort of union and non-union workers to concede in recent years is appreciated and this should not be
undervalued. At the same time, it is extremely important for all concerned to realize conservative, creative
negotiations must be a serious, continued consideration as the district moves forward.
The administrative union contains the highest salaries in our school district, but the total dollars represented
by it is much lower, obviously, than our direct children service and related support union staff.
Another serious sustainability issue for our school district is the present loss of state aid as a result of the
great recession. As seen in the following charts, the Gap Elimination Adjustment, or GEA, has accounted to
nearly 40 million dollars over the past four years, including next year. The original (Deficit Reduction Act,
or DRA) under Governor Patersons last fiscal planning years, also took millions of dollars of state aid from
us. Additionally, the frozen and reduced Foundation State Aid not given to our school district accounts to
over 84 million dollars as the following chart indicates. The sum of all these loss aids almost equals 90% of
the districts five year total annual average expenditures. Most people do not realize that in actual dollars our
school district receives more state aid than all districts in western New York except for the Buffalo City
School District; therefore, the permanent loss of these aids affects us more than any suburban school district.
73
74
All of the issues mentioned here permanently affect the districts ability to support student programming and
the number of school buildings in our school district.
75
17. More State Aid and Lower Class Sizes May Not Be All We Need
Another aspect weve heard over the course of this project is perhaps just more money and lower class sizes
will solve the issues that we are facing. While valid research supports lower class sizes and its effect on
student achievement, there are some caveats to that research. Taking a look at the last full decade before the
great recession may exemplify these caveats in our own school district:
The decade analyzed by the district is 1997-2007, the last full decade before the Great Recession. As we see
in the following charts, lower class section guidelines, spending more money, and receiving more state aid
do not automatically translate into higher student achievement at all, and these findings beg the question if
district reorganization may help better spend resources to raise student achievement:
76
77
78
18. Latest Enrollment Projections
The SES Study Team utilized enrollment trend data in their work last school year. Our school district revised
enrollment projections this past December and the result of that projection is at this link:
http://www.kenton.k12.ny.us/cms/lib/NY19000262/Centricity/Domain/1884/Enrollment%20projections.-
2%20pptx.pdf
The DecisionInsite Company, nationally known school demographic and building capacity analysis
specialists, performed their own enrollment projections and those results are contained here. It is rare for a
school district to have the opportunity to triangulate student enrollment trends through three different
sources. The triangulation of data all suggests the same thing-that our secondary attendance zones will
continue to decrease over the mid-range and to a lesser extent the same is true for our elementary zones. The
long range projections seem to indicate a more leveling off of younger aged school enrollment declines. This
massive triangulation of enrollment trend data had a direct impact on the scenario inputs for analysis.
Comparison in Projections
DecisionInsite and Ken-Ton District's Projections
DecisionInsite Conservative
School 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Edison ES 485 471 432 476 449 432 423 397 401
Franklin ES 559 514 477 563 541 533 508 500 486
Hamilton ES 410 420 352 319 299 285 269 261 260
Holmes ES 361 379 339 338 334 332 321 322 321
Hoover ES 616 608 570 584 563 552 546 523 524
Lindbergh ES 533 527 501 534 482 461 437 411 412
Roosevelt ES 374 358 316 292 288 275 270 267 268
Franklin MS 534 515 497 482 454 419 390 367 370
Hoover MS 683 652 630 575 577 551 510 493 482
Kenmore MS 657 673 625 585 558 509 497 475 452
Kenmore East HS 1,146 1,084 986 934 869 801 777 730 680
Kenmore West HS 1,495 1,417 1,367 1,365 1,314 1,290 1,232 1,196 1,151
District-wide Totals 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
K-5 Total 3,366 3,344 3,276 3,106 3,018 3,002 2,960 2,912 2,919
6-8 Total 1,783 1,757 1,752 1,642 1,626 1,552 1,500 1,460 1,455
9-12 Total 2,571 2,461 2,353 2,299 2,202 2,140 2,093 2,047 1,983
K-12 Total 7,720 7,562 7,381 7,047 6,846 6,694 6,553 6,419 6,357
Note: District-wide totals include enrollment counts for Jefferson ES, which closed after the 2012 school
year. Also include counts for all SDC students.
DecisionInsite Moderate
School 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Edison ES 485 471 432 476 454 441 438 416 425
Franklin ES 559 514 477 563 554 566 560 571 574
Hamilton ES 410 420 352 319 300 289 275 269 269
79
Holmes ES 361 379 339 338 340 345 344 348 350
Hoover ES 616 608 570 584 565 556 550 527 528
Lindbergh ES 533 527 501 534 494 480 463 439 447
Roosevelt ES 374 358 316 292 293 285 281 284 286
Franklin MS 534 515 497 482 458 424 399 378 384
Hoover MS 683 652 630 575 585 565 529 516 505
Kenmore MS 657 673 625 585 569 532 528 509 487
Kenmore East HS 1,146 1,084 986 934 873 811 793 750 701
Kenmore West HS 1,495 1,417 1,367 1,365 1,326 1,318 1,275 1,257 1,226
K-5 Total 3,366 3,344 3,276 3,106 3,060 3,083 3,082 3,070 3,099
6-8 Total 1,783 1,757 1,752 1,642 1,638 1,574 1,525 1,500 1,502
9-12 Total 2,571 2,461 2,353 2,299 2,216 2,170 2,138 2,105 2,048
K-12 Total 7,720 7,562 7,381 7,047 6,914 6,827 6,745 6,675 6,649
Note: District-wide totals include enrollment counts for Jefferson ES, which closed after the 2012 school
year. Also include counts for all SDC students.
Kenmore-Tonawanda Union Free SD Projections
School 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Edison ES 454 446 433 476 467 465 464 443 450
Franklin ES 506 463 478 564 571 586 575 578 552
Hamilton ES 382 363 352 319 297 281 266 257 250
Holmes ES 292 331 339 337 338 341 336 340 334
Hoover ES 586 577 570 593 606 631 652 637 640
Lindbergh ES 513 510 501 534 502 502 494 478 488
Roosevelt ES 353 333 316 292 302 303 306 310 311
Franklin MS 502 484 497 482 478 465 443 434 432
Hoover MS 651 639 630 587 582 544 498 467 449
Kenmore MS 628 643 625 589 570 527 526 512 509
Kenmore East HS 1,137 1,083 981 946 899 848 812 752 686
Kenmore West HS 1,434 1,341 1,344 1,350 1,313 1,308 1,275 1,264 1,214
K-5 Total 3,389 3,335 3,278 3,115 3,052 3,057 3,039 3,007 3,014
6-8 Total 1,781 1,766 1,752 1,658 1,643 1,568 1,517 1,480 1,472
9-12 Total 2,571 2,424 2,325 2,296 2,213 2,174 2,122 2,088 2,005
K-12 Total 7,741 7,525 7,355 7,069 6,908 6,799 6,678 6,575 6,491
Difference 21 -37 -26 22 62 105 125 156 134

80
CENSUS DEMOGRAPHIC DATABY SCHOOL DISTRICT ATTENDANCE ZONES

SES Study Team 2013:
Some observations of the attendance area demographic data for discussion include:
o The Franklin and Holmes attendance zones currently have the highest percentage of potential future
public school pupil client population.
o The Edison and Franklin attendance zones currently are home to the highest percentage of families.
However, Edison has a much older median age of population (45.68 years) compared to Franklin
with a 36.48 years median age.
o Franklin and Holmes elementary attendance zones have the highest percentage of households with
children under 18 years of age.
o The Edison elementary attendance zone has the highest percentage of households with population 65
or older.
o The Roosevelt, Franklin and Holmes elementary attendance zones have the highest percentages of all
families within each respective attendance zone with income below the poverty level in the past 12
months. Roosevelt, Franklin and Holmes elementary attendance zones have the highest percentages
of child-bearing population 21 to 44 years old.
o The Franklin elementary attendance zone has the highest average household size among the
elementary attendance zones.
o The Jefferson and Edison elementary attendance zones along with Lindbergh have the highest
percentages of households with population 65 years and older, and the two attendance zones have the
highest percentage of single family housing units among all the attendance zones.
o The highest average size for renter households is in the Hamilton and Franklin elementary attendance
zones.
81
19. Environmental Scans of the Scenarios by District Personnel
Environmental Scans were given to the districts Curriculum Learning Specialists, Administrators, and
Department Supervisors for consideration of the four scenarios. Summaries of all these data and an updated
summary by our Athletic Director follow here:
SCENARIO G
This is a modified SES Study Group suggested G scenario that the districts Focus Group prioritized as a top choice
during the Study Groups June 8, 2013 all day exercise. It calls for the reduction of one elementary school and one
middle school but DOES NOT specify which ones, although Franklin Middle School is likely NOT to be considered for
reduction in this scenario. Rezoning of all remaining six elementary schools would take place and one of the middle
school populations would be split into the remaining two. This scenario preserves neighborhood schools while
eliminating one and it reduces the class underutilization percentage in the remaining middle schools. High Schools
remain as they are, and all current grade level configurations remain thus maintaining two major transitions for all
students elementary to middle, and middle to high. This scenario would reduce two (2) school buildings. Current
research indicates that enrollment decline is likely to continue, which would result in additional school closings and
redistricting over the next few years.
ADMINISTRATION:
School Challenges Opportunities Cost Savings

KENMORE EAST Prolongs stress on Efficient use of Staffing
families district facilities Building operations
Sharing classroom
space
Rezoning middle
school pathways to
high schools
Transportation
KENMORE WEST May negatively Small high schools Staffing
impact community with more student Building operations
and student attention
enrollment Maintain high
school identity and
tradition, alumni
connection
FRANKLIN MIDDLE Increased student Reduce travel Staffing
enrollment with 1.8 teachers
administrators Maintain pathways
Rezoning with just 2 major
Shared staffing transitional years
Establishing new
school culture
Transportation
Future potential
closings
Classroom
allocations
82
currently 5th grade

rooms are housed
in FMS even though
they are
elementary-FMS
may need them
KENMORE MIDDLE Shared staff Middle school Big Staffing
Class size Picture Program
Parking lot/traffic Consistent
Administrative pathways across
support Asst. buildings
principals full time Restore teaming
School culture Restore full time
Transportation Asst. Principals
Earlier bell
schedule
PD for middle level
teachers
HOOVER MIDDLE Shared staffing Middle school Big Staffing
Class sizes that Picture Program
exceed the Consistent
guidelines pathways across
New building buildings
culture Restore teaming
Parking lot/traffic Restore full time
Asst. Principals
Earlier bell
schedule
PD for middle level
teachers
LINDBERGH Multiple school Staffing
ELEMENTARY moves
Uneven class size
Rezoning
Community support
of neighborhood
schools
ROOSEVELT Redistribution of Full time Building operations
ELEMENTARY socially counselors Staffing
disadvantaged Full time librarians
students
students with
disabilities
teachers based
on certification
Class size
Transportation
Rezoning
83
EDISON ELEMENTARY Socioeconomic and District run Pre-K

academic status Consistency of
equity curriculum
Transportation Full time social
issues service providers
Access to social Improved school
services hours
Availability to
technology
Class size
Facility updates
Administrative
support
HAMILTON Continuation of Create 3 primary Staffing
ELEMENTARY school closings and 3 intermediate Per pupil expenditures
Rezoning buildings due to maximized
Transportation utilization of current
route efficiency materials
HOLMES ELEMENTARY Rezoning Improve pathways Staffing
Training staff on of students (3 elem Building and Grounds
changing schools go to 1 BOCES cost savings
demographics middle go to 1
Physical move high)
Remodel buildings Strong 2-3 person
administrative
teams at each site
Resources more
readily available
FRANKLIN Reallocation of staff Targeted staffing Staffing
ELEMENTARY Parent concerns Targeted Materials/supplies
Increased class size instruction
Parking/traffic Redeploy supplies
Physical space and materials
Scheduling issues
Need additional
administrator
support
PD
Loss of Title funding
HOOVER ELEMENTARY Transportation Multiple Building operation
administrators
Collaboration
opportunities for
teachers and
administrators
84
CURRICULUM LEARNING SPECIALISTS:
Subject Content Area Challenges Opportunities Cost Savings

FACS $ needed at both
middle schools
Space FACS rooms
big enough for
additional
students?
ART Classroom space
LIBRARY Shared library Streamline Distribution of
space by curriculum materials from closed
elementary & buildings
middle students
PE Increased class Reestablish Disbursing materials,
sizes intramurals supplies, equipment
Space/Facilities program to active schools
Meet state
mandated minutes
in PE
Reassign teachers
as needed to
Adaptive Physical
Education/Health
TECH Classroom space Operation of 1 less
facility Tech Lab
modifications
LOTE LOTE in Grade 6
MUSIC Classroom space for Different musical Less travel teachers
music classes, large ensembles grouped
group rehearsals by ability levels
and small group Potential for middle
lessons school ensembles
(BOC) to meet
during day
Create a music wing
@ Hoover/Franklin
BUSINESS Revenue from sale of
2 buildings
MATH EL Reallocation of
elementary math
materials
ELA/ENGLISH Balanced class sizes
(Elementary) in remaining
buildings
ENGLISH (Secondary) Classroom space Larger middle
school staff to
preserve middle
level model.
85
SOCIAL STUDIES Stronger

dept/teams @ MS
level
Better class
distribution
SCIENCE Classroom space Communication
facilities
SPECIAL EDUCATION Classroom space Increase in co Decrease in travel
IEP mandates (ex. taught classes time for teachers
Separate location Increase in
for testing or grouping
related services) differentiation of
Consideration of students
self-contained
classrooms and
feeder pattern
DIRECTORS:
Area Challenges Opportunities Cost Savings

B&G Move management Redistribute
Asset redistribution personnel
Hardware Sale of Ad Building
Key re-cutting and Sheridan
Maintenance Building
Continual disruption Standardize all
until final custodial products
redistricting
decision is realized
Major renovation
costs
Relocation costs
Replacement of F F
&E
CHILD NUTRITION Serve on carts Max use of staff Labor costs
Time to serve all Productivity
(At this time 40% of Prep time
students qualify for free
or reduced meals. That
number will continue to
rise as our enrollment
decreases. A hungry
child cannot learn.)
TRANSPORTATION Loading/unloading
zones need to be
assessed
Route times longer
School times
reevaluated
86
Most middle/high
walkers will be
bussed now
Some middle/high
bussers will now
walk
Determining # of
busses required is
based on a divisor
which is different
for elementary (66)
students and
middle/high (44)
students
Need additional
busses
Bell time conflicts
TECH PARCC one device Allow techs to 5 year replacement
per student in the focus on fewer cycle costs
largest grade level buildings
Labs space for, Move wireless
equipment in, cost access points to
to license programs open buildings
on, etc. Standardized
Redeployment of classroom to house
equipment, IT equipment
physically and Use of Thin client
equitability technology in low
Wiring needs level labs &
Network size needs libraries
to increase Updated phone
system
ATHLETICS Loss of gym space, Return of modified Salary
fields, pool for team sports such as Transportation
use baseball, softball, Materials & supplies
Elimination of 200 and others Supervision
modified roster Funded afterschool
spots closing a and Saturday
middle school intramural
Storage space program
Loss of weight Post and select
room, wresting middle school
room coaching positions
Renovations More competitive
teams
STAFF DEVELOPMENT SDC mission is not
CENTER impacted by
Scenario G.
87
NURSES 1 Floater nurse to Staff reduction (1)

assist with sub
coverage
COUNSELORS Social workers for Staffing
SOCIAL WORKERS the middle school
complexes
ADMINISTRATIVE DUTIES:

CAREER OPTION II Long Term Planning Strength pathways
Budgeting Strengthen vertical
& horizontal
articulation
FMS SCHOLASTIC TECH Tech would need to More specialists in
BASED INTERVENTION be shifted to one location
account for larger currently spread
student population thin across district
LITERACY Managing resources Streamline PD Great inventory of
and materials Transition AIS literacy materials
Sustaining literacy teachers to literacy Travel teachers
focused culture coaches
Transitioning roles
of Building Literacy
Facilitators in
schools
Training for some
teachers in
Expeditionary
Learning, Leveled
Literacy Instruction,
Mentors
SECONDARY LITERACY Less opportunity for Staffing
vertical alignment
Isolated buildings
READING RECOVERY Services provided
only in the Title
building
If Title designation
is lost, the funding
would have to come
from an alternate
source for staff,
materials, supplies
ELEMENTARY AIS Enhance early
intervention
MS AIS Increase # of Potential balance
students eligible for of AIS staff
AIS
Shared staff
88
ELEMENTARY TECH Deploy Tech

according to
enrollment
SECONDARY TECH Deploy surplus Replace outdated Network cost savings
equipment computers with
Physically move iPads
equipment
Are schools wired
properly?
Space for all labs?
ELEMENTARY SCIENCE New staff on District Redeploy materials
Science Committee and supplies
ELEMENTARY SOCIAL Textbook & supply Materials not needed
STUDIES storage + for quite a while
redistribution
Physical
organization +
packing/moving of
materials at each
grade level
Redistribution of
teachers based on
certification at all
levels
ELEMENTARY MATH Moving materials
(learn from the
Jefferson move)
Storage/labeling
UPK Space for UPK UPK in all buildings If any UPK is
rooms? eliminated, it may
Location of UPK offset costs for other
what buildings? budget items
Collaboration of
UPK teachers
DASA Building culture Return Teaming to Staffing
SAVE middle school
CONSOLIDATION TITLE Closing Holmes Parent
GRANT would alter Title involvement
designations Reallocation of
Title I comparability funding to
(these buildings buildings that have
should have lowest never been Title
ratios of teachers to buildings before
students)
Staff reallocation
under Title
Private school Title
issues
89
ELL Room space Limiting number of Travel teachers

schools that service
ELL students
FOCUS SCHOOL Stress on families Efficient use of Staffing
Pathway to high district facilities Utilities
schools from middle Student Operational costs
Community chooses individualized
not to move into attention
Kenton
Shared classrooms
at middle levels
Student enrollment
TWILIGHT None if 2 high
schools stayed the
same BOCES
program would
carry on
GED ALP Location changes Bringing ALP
programs in house
Evaluate success
rate of GED/ALP
programs and seek
cost effective
alternatives if
appropriate
APPR Communication of APPR Program Travel teachers
layoffs need to be Supervisor, one
handled sensitively less school to
Some Jefferson evaluate
families will move PTAs become
again stronger/combined
Possible need for
Teacher Assistants
90
SCENARIO I
This is a non SES Study Group suggested scenario whereby each current high school is transformed into a grades 8-12
program, Kenmore Middle is closed, grades 5-7 replace the current middle school grade configuration at Franklin and
Hoover middle schools, and grades PK-4 run at 4 or 5 elementary buildings. Grade 8 being added to the high schools
and the grade reconfiguration at the middle school level coupled with the closing of Kenmore Middle decreases their
underutilized space. Rezoning of all remaining elementary schools would take place and the Kenmore Middle
population would be split between Hoover and Franklin. There are two main transitions for all students in this
scenario. This scenario may reduce up to four (4) current school buildings. This would decrease the likelihood of
additional school closings being necessary over the next 5-10 years.
ADMINISTRATION:

KENMORE EAST District zoning Continuity of program Staffing
Break of current Advanced Building operations
middle school into 8-12 opportunities
program will require Earlier exposure to
sensitivity to high school may
social/emotional needs decrease exit to
of students and private schools
families
Addressing all parent
concerns
Facilities enough
space
Athletics scheduling
for all sports
Transportation
KENMORE WEST Space concerns/limits Increased time for Staffing
Scheduling issues staff to learn students Building operations
Teacher sharing space strengths and
and need work stations weaknesses
Combined grade level Better utilization of
classes, study halls, PE, high school spaces
lunch, etc. Reduce shared staff
Social emotional issues between high &
Traffic middle school
Increased SRO Preserve athletics
presence program and other
Parent drop off area extended
Parking opportunities for
students
Maintain high school
identities, traditions,
alumni
Opportunities for
expansion still
91
possible
FRANKLIN Grade 5-7 middle Reduce travel Staffing
MIDDLE school is putting 2 teachers
elementary grades into Maintain pathways
one middle level grade with just 2 major
certification will be transitional years
an issue
Special area courses
will be an issue to
schedule based on
State Ed regs
Modified sports
KENMORE Modified sports Implement IB at lower Staffing
MIDDLE Support parents grades
Housing 2 common Mentorships at
branch grade levels middle school
and 1 secondary grade Less transitions for
level in the same students
complex
Scheduling special area
classes
Professional
development for staff
and teachers
HOOVER MIDDLE Middle school Big Implement IB at lower Staffing
Picture Program grades
Consistent pathways Mentorships at
across buildings middle school
Restore teaming Less transitions for
Restore full time Asst. students
Principals
Earlier bell schedule
PD for middle level
teachers
LINDBERGH Communication and Targeted PD Consistent enrollment
transition information Consistent use of Staffing
to parents technology K-5
Physically transitioning Stronger early
student to 4-5 intervention for PK-2
different buildings Summer learning
program for age four
before PK students
ROOSEVELT Redistribution of Full time counselors Staffing
socially disadvantaged Full time librarian Building operations
students Less travel teachers Furniture
students with
disabilities
teachers based on
certification
92
class size
transportation
rezoning
large grade span-need
additional
administrators
EDISON Socioeconomic and Consistent delivery of Staffing
academic status equity curriculum Building operations
Transportation issues Social/emotional Furniture
Access to social development Textbooks
services Administrative Supplies/materials
Availability to collaboration
technology Improved school
Class size hours
Facility updates
Administrative support
Retrofitting buildings
Restructuring of offices
HAMILTON Large grade span at HS Streamlined Staffing
level curriculum
Security at HS AP courses to younger
Attendance rates students
Transportation route
efficiency
HOLMES Rezoning Pre-K full day Staffing
Communication to Advanced coursework
parents for 8th graders
Transportation Departmentalize gr.
Need strong 2-3 5&6
person administrator Teaming at MS
teams at each site Themed middle
schools
Consistent staff
development
Partnerships with
universities
Redeploy AIS staff as
Math/Literacy
coaches
FRANKLIN EL Reallocation of staffing Targeted staffing Staffing
Parent concerns Targeted instruction Building operations
Increased class size Redeploy materials &
Safety concerns supplies
Parking/traffic
Scheduling issues
Additional
administrator needed
93
HOOVER EL 13-19 yr old age span is Multiple Building operations

very concerning administrators
Professional working together
development costs Common day cycles
Transportation
Subject Content Challenges Opportunities Cost Savings

Area
FACS Classroom/Facility Develop a stronger Creative uses for
space transition program for 5th vacated
graders entering middle buildings
school Reduced cost on
Expand FACS to Grade 5 staffing,
maintenance,
utilities
ART Classroom/Facility Collaboration/Resource
space sharing
Accelerated programming
LIBRARY Reallocation of some Ease some financial
library collection for concerns
grade
appropriateness
Space for materials
PE Facility Redesign of PK-4 Disbursing
space/teaching curriculum materials,
stations Minutes mandate met equipment,
Class sizes Health curriculum infused supplies to
Health 7th/8th in Elementary active schools
requirement will need
to be scheduled
efficiently
TECH Classroom facility Accelerated opportunities Upkeep of less
space HS Tech Tech labs
rooms need to be
shared and/or need
more space for Gr. 8
mandate
LOTE Transition between 7- Begin Grade 6
8th grade LOTE starts
in 7th
MUSIC Classroom facilities Different musical Less travel
space for small group, ensembles grouped by teachers
whole group, ability levels
ensemble Potential for middle school
(BOC) to meet during day
Create a music wing @
Hoover/Franklin
94
MATH Reallocation of Vertical articulation of

(Elementary) elementary math curriculum
materials
MATH (Secondary) Classroom space
Elective course
offerings will need to
be prioritized
ELA (Elementary) Structure of grades Extended learning
configuration 5-7 segments if building
would be challenging scheduled like an
ELA CLS would need elementary not 43 min
to align with building, periods
not certification
ENGLISH Classroom space
(Secondary) scheduling
SOCIAL STUDIES Age range potential Advanced 8th Global? Save on travel
12-13 with 18-19 yrs. teachers
7th/8th content is
married 2 yr
American History
course
SCIENCE Lab space issue Increase in
Earth Science all back communication/support
@ HS could be an Increase in equipment
issue
SPECIAL Classroom space Increase co taught classes
EDUCATION IEP Mandates (ex. Increase grouping
Separate location for differentiation of students
testing or related
services)
Even more difficult
mixing middle/high
with state, local,
regents assessments
Social considerations
8th graders (13 yrs)
w/seniors (19 yrs)
DIRECTORS:

B&G Renovations Adaptive reuse of KMS Operational
Relocation costs Sports complex at KMS costs
Consultant service Staffing
needed Janitorial costs
OT man hours
CHILD NUTRITION 8th grade must be Consideration of meal Labor costs
(At this time 40% of scheduled separately delivery options
students qualify for from 9-12 students Increase productivity
95
free or reduced meals. according to SED

That number will Time for meal preps
continue to rise as our
enrollment decreases.
A hungry child cannot
learn.)
zones need to be
assessed
Route times longer
School times
reevaluated
Most middle/high
walkers will be bussed
now
Some middle/high
bussers will now walk
Determining # of
busses required is
based on a divisor
which is different for
elementary (66)
students and
middle/high (44)
students
Need additional
busses
Bell time conflicts
Not enough time
between bus runs
TECH PARCC one device Allow techs to focus on 5 year
per student in the fewer buildings replacement
largest grade level Move wireless access cycle costs
Labs space for, points to open buildings
equipment in, cost to Standardized classroom
license programs on, to house IT equipment
etc. Use of Thin client
Redeployment of technology in low level
equipment, physically labs & libraries
and equitability Updated phone system
Wiring needs Justification to bring tech
Network size needs to into student hands, less
increase lab
More work during
second shift hours
Scheduling issues
Need to support
students and staff
after hours
96
ATHLETICS Double layer of Improved

modified communication between
programming 2 high coaches
schools for 8th graders New level of modified
and 2 middle schools programming for 7th &
for 7th graders 8th graders
Practice schedule New intramural program
would be exceedingly for 5-7 graders
difficult with some
teams not starting
until 9pm
Loss of gyms, fields,
pools, weight room,
wrestling room at
elementary currently
used by our high
school teams
Increased spending
STAFF Staff in grade 8-12 Wireless connectivity
DEVELOPMENT would benefit from Student transitions
CENTER workshops regarding opportunity to create
developmental needs smoother changes
(social-emotional) of SDC workshops to
students include special area and
Continue to link our content area teachers
services to the needs
of staff and students
Renovations
Technology
equipment loan cycle
based on larger
numbers per school
could be challenging
NURSES 2 nurses at each 8-12 Staff reduction
schools who could assist (2)
with sub shortage as
needed
COUNSELORS Will 5th grade be School counselor ratio
departmentalized? 1:235
Grade level counselors
plus additional counselor
for at risk students and
program oversight
May have opportunity to
hire social worker for
middle school
97

Area
CAREER OPTION II High schools very MS IB Program Staffing
large so shift in COII No further closings thus
allocations no additional long term
Elimination of COII revisions
neighborhood
schools always
challenging
Does not align with
the 3-8 assessment
structure
FMS SCHOLASTIC High school teachers
TECH BASED would need PD (via
INTERVENTION district teachers)
High schools would
need to add Read
180/System 44 labs
LITERACY Managing resources Streamline PD No need to
and materials Transition AIS teachers to purchase more
Sustaining a literacy literacy coaches resources
focused culture Fidelity of CCLS module Travel teachers
Transitioning roles of implementation
Building Literacy Stronger pathways for
Facilitators in schools literacy
PD in balanced Creation of Director of
literacy (all levels) ELA K-12
CCLS, student
engagement
SECONDARY Students at these 7th grade teachers could Staffing
LITERACY developmental ages grow from elementary Reduction of AIS
are different teacher practices services
language acquisition
and reading levels
targeted
interventions would
be necessary
Certification of
teachers
only in the Title
building
If Title designation is
lost, the funding
would have to come
from an alternate
source for staff,
materials, supplies
98

intervention
MS AIS Certification of PD opportunities for 7th
teachers issue grade teachers to learn
from elementary
colleagues
ELEMENTARY TECH Use of existing Increased flexibility to Replacement
hardwire/electrical in use tech in classrooms cycle
place, i.e., currently
5th grade uses laptops
that rooms have been
wired for
Recommendation
would be to
reallocate and use at
a different
elementary level.
Too costly to rework
at different building
SECONDARY TECH More lab space Replace outdated
needed computers with iPads
Programs like Read
180 and Fast Math
will need to be put
into the High School
Relocation of laptop
carts
Elementary computer
programs (software)
moved to middle
schools
More licensing fees
ELEMENTARY New staff on District Redeploy materials and Savings in
SCIENCE Science Committee supplies materials and
supplies
ELEMENTARY Textbook & supply PD opportunities from Savings on

SOCIAL STUDIES storage + publishing company materials
redistribution More access to
Physical organization technology
+ packing/moving of
materials at each
grade level
Redistribution of
teachers based on
levels
99
ELEMENTARY MATH Moving materials Vertical alignment

Storage/labeling between 5th/6th grade
5th grade materials
equally distributed to
the middle schools
UPK Attendance rates may Streamlined UPK If UPK is
drop curriculum eliminated,
Which elementary UPK in all buildings offset costs for
schools? other budget
Collaboration of UPK items
teachers
DASA Building culture More programs to lower Staffing
SAVE Increase police level Building costs
presence at 8-12 Less school transition
school over student career
Earlier preparing for
college and career
readiness
CONSOLIDATED Closing Holmes would Parent involvement
TITLE GRANT alter Title ELL housed in one
designations building
Title I comparability After school programs in
(these buildings one building
should have lowest
ratios of teachers to
students)
Staff reallocation
under Title
issues
ELL More travel time due Limiting number of Travel teachers
to increased number schools that service ELL
of ELL students in 8- students
12 building
FOCUS SCHOOL District zones Continuity of program Staffing
Splitting into 8-12 Student individualized Utilities
program will be a attention Operational costs
challenge at first Reduced shared staff
Social-emotional
concern for students
Structural/space
KW will likely have
more NYS monitored
subgroups
Combined grade level
classes, study halls,
lunches, PE
Planning of events
(parents conferences,
100
building permits)
Traffic/parking
TWILIGHT Program could continue
at BOCES as is
GED ALP Consistency of Student transition Efficient staff
discipline 8-12 opportunities usage
Staff support system i.e., Efficient
social worker transportation
APPR Preparing 4th graders 8th grade Building
for middle school students/parents gain a maintenance
may be a challenge clearer understanding of
Transportation high school requirements
101
SCENARIO J
This is a non SES Study Group suggested scenario whereby each current high school becomes a junior-senior high
school grades 7-12. A number of PK-6 programs run at the Hoover and Franklin complexes and two PK-6 specialty or
themed schools would run in two undetermined elementary schools. This specialty or themed concept recognizes
the ongoing struggle to do everything at all school sites. For example, perhaps International Baccalaureate Primary
Years could be implemented for one school as opposed to trying to create the program in 6-7 different schools. As
another example, this concept may also recognize either a geographic or demographic uniqueness in our community.
It may be possible that an application process is used for these themed schools to a degree. Neighborhood
elementary schools as a district wide geographic program would be lessened to a large degree but as many as six
separate elementary programs would remain. Grades 7-12 junior-senior high school is a configuration used
throughout the state and this scenario reduces underutilization in our current secondary buildings the most. There
would be one major transition for all students and this scenario may reduce up to four (4) school buildings. This
would decrease the likelihood of additional school closings being necessary over the next 5-10 years.
ADMINISTRATION:

KENMORE EAST Criteria for Increase student Staffing
redeployment of knowledge-more time Building
teaching and with child operations
administrative staff Fewer student transitions
Additional over his/her career
administrative staff to Specialization at
handle increased elementary level
student load? Address broad spectrum
Schools functioning of social/emotional needs
system (house,
teams, etc.)
Athletics-scheduling
for all sports
Facilities, space for all
(computer lab,
science labs, gyms,
special ed rooms,
etc.)
Small elementary
building concept will
be lost
KENMORE WEST Space concerns/limits Increased time for staff to Shared staffing
Scheduling issues learn students strengths Building
Teacher sharing space & weaknesses operations
and need work Better utilization of high
stations school spaces
Combined grade level Reduction of shared staff
classes, study halls, between middle & high
PE, lunch, etc. schools
Reduced library Preserve athletics
102
access program and other

Traffic opportunities for students
Social/emotional Maintain high school
issues identities, traditions,
Anticipated loss of alumni
residents Opportunities for
Expansion limitations expansion still possible
Parent drop off area Themed schools at
Parking elementary/middle
May attract new residents
to themed schools
FRANKLIN MIDDLE Special area Travel teachers reduced Staffing
classrooms would Athletic opportunities for
require major 7/8th graders
renovations at the Fewer transitions
high schools
Rezoning
Reorganization of
building to
appropriately
accommodate 11-18
year old students
New school culture
Administrative Team
Functioning system
KENMORE MIDDLE Application process Middle school version of Staffing
for themed schools Big Picture Building
Building layouts Expand IB program operations
Transition time for More neighborhood
teachers and schools
community Student mentorship
Administrative programs
structure Athletic opportunities
Grade level, full time
principals & counselors
HOOVER MIDDLE Application process Middle school version of Staffing
for themed schools Big Picture Building
Building layouts Expand IB program operations
Transition time for More neighborhood
teachers and schools
community Student mentorship
Administrative programs
structure Athletic opportunities
Grade level, full time
principals & counselors
LINDBERGH Physically Students remain at Staffing
transitioning students elementary for 6th grade
to new buildings PK-2 Learning to Read
3-6 Reading to Learn
103
PD
Themed schools
socially Full time librarian Building
disadvantaged Less travel teachers operations
students Great consistency in Furniture
students with instruction Pre-K run
disabilities through YMCA
teachers based on
certification
class size
transportation
rezoning
large grade span-
need additional
administrators
EDISON Retrofit middle Curricular pathways
schools Themed schools
Restructure collaboration
administration One time consolidation
Themed school
application process
Physical movement of
materials, supplies,
furniture, equipment
Transportation
Community
demographics
HAMILTON Large grade span at Cutting edge educational Staffing
HS models in our district
5-8 middle level is Transportation efficiency
research based
Themed concept
Timeframe
Professional
development costs
HOLMES Rezoning Full day Pre-K Staffing
Communication to Advanced coursework for Building
parents 8th grade operations
Transportation Teams at middle school BOCES costs
Social/emotional Consistent PD
needs of 12-18 year
olds together
Needs strong 2-3
person admin team at
each site
Themed school
application process
Physical moves
104
Remodeling
FRANKLIN EL Reallocation of Targeted staffing Staffing
staffing Targeted instruction Materials and
Parent concerns Redeploy materials and supplies
Increased class size supplies
Safety concerns
Parking/traffic
Physical space for PT-
OT-Special Ed-GT-AIS
Scheduling issues
Need for additional
administrator
HOOVER EL Parental involvement Enhancement built into Staffing
Smooth community elementary programs Building
relations operations
Transportation

Area
FACS Social issues (student Specialized subject matter
disconnect, 7th grade creates unique
not mature enough opportunities
for HS setting, staff
morale, high level of
competition for
limited # of slots
Themed schools
application process
for students and
staff
ART Classroom facility PD opportunities
space Expanded course
Themed schools offerings
application process Increased student
for students achievement
LIBRARY 7-9/10-12 collections Library Media Program
are not appropriate became more laser like
for each other focused
Social issues 7-9/10-
12
Re-appropriation of
collection from
elementary to
middles, middle to
high as appropriate
105
PE Space/Facilities Redesign of 7-12 PK-6 Disbursing

Class size curriculum materials,
Schedule efficiently Health curriculum infused supplies,
Curriculum map will in elementary schools equipment to
need to be realigned active schools
Adaptive Physical
Education
6th grade elementary
minutes
TECH Classroom facility Current 6-12 Project Lead
space need at least The Way expanded to K-
double the current 12
space currently
allocated
LOTE Crowding Dual language immersion Less travel
schools teachers
MUSIC Classroom facilities Different musical Less travel
space for small ensembles grouped by teachers
group, whole group, ability levels
and ensemble will Potential for middle
there be enough? school (BOC) to meet
during day
Create a music wing @
Hoover/Franklin
BUSINESS Social issues 7th Maximum class size @ all Revenue from
grade w/12th grade levels sale of buildings
Computer instruction and staff
taught at what reductions
grade?
MATH (Elementary) Reallocation of Since in fewer schools,
elementary math greater fidelity in
materials implementation of
curriculum
More colleagues to
collaborate with daily
MATH (Secondary) Classroom space
Elective course
be prioritized
ELA (Elementary) Themed school Gives CLS more
application process? opportunity to work with
Student & staff teachers in fewer
PD for themed buildings
schools
ENGLISH National & State Teachers have greater
(Secondary) standards define ability to collaborate
secondary as 6-12 IB program growth
This scenario
ignores.
106
Themed schools =
tracking
Themed schools
application process?
Academic support
for students may be
lost
Middle level seems
to be lost
SOCIAL STUDIES Age range Better class distribution Save on travel
Sectionalize across district teachers
department perhaps Richer collaboration Less Early
among teachers regarding Release days
curriculum and students
SCIENCE Lab space issue Increase in
Earth Science all communication/ support
back @ HS could be Consolidate equipment
an issue
SPECIAL EDUCATION Classroom space Increase co taught classes
IEP Mandates (ex. Increase grouping
Separate location for differentiation of
testing or related students
services)
Even more difficult
mixing middle/high
with state, local,
regents assessments
7th (12 yrs) w/seniors
(19 yrs)
Theme school
application process
concern of excluding
special ed students
DIRECTORS:

B&G Internal infrastructure Focused renovation
improvements Educational &
Operations & operational program
maintenance alignment
Surplussed staff
Technology
deployment
CHILD NUTRITION 7th & 8th grade would Consideration of meal Labor costs
(At this time 40% of need to scheduled delivery options
students qualify for separate from 9-12 Increased productivity
free or reduced according to SED
107
meals. That number regulations

will continue to rise Time for meal prep
as our enrollment
decreases. A hungry
child cannot learn.)
zones need to be
assessed
Route times longer
School times
reevaluated
Most middle/high
now
Some middle/high
Determining # of
busses required is
based on a divisor
elementary (66)
students and
middle/high (44)
students
Need additional
busses
Bell time conflicts
Not enough time
between bus runs
Themed schools are
not cost effective or
efficient
Require multiple bus
coverage of every
transportation zone
Additional routes with
fewer students per
route
TECH PARCC one device Allow techs to focus on 5 year
per student in the fewer buildings replacement
largest grade level Move wireless access cycle costs
Labs space for, points to open buildings
equipment in, cost to Standardized classroom
license programs on, to house IT equipment
etc. Use of Thin client
Redeployment of technology in low level
equipment, physically labs & libraries
and equitability Updated phone system
Wiring needs Justification to bring tech
108
Network size needs to into student hands, less

increase lab
More work during
second shift hours
Scheduling issues
Need to support
students and staff
after hours
ATHLETICS This plan would not Increased
improve Athletics communication between
Department coaches
Double layer of New PK-6 intramural
modified sports program could be
programming 2 high created
schools for 8th graders
and 2 middle schools
for 7th graders
Practice schedule
would be exceedingly
difficult with some
teams not starting
until 9pm
Loss of gyms, fields,
pools, weight room,
wrestling room at
elementary currently
used by our high
school teams
Increased spending
STAFF Themed schools If SDC is to be relocated,
DEVELOPMENT sounds like please consider doing so
CENTER homogeneous at a secondary school to
grouping research allow for direct support
suggest this is not service to students and
optimal staff. We currently use
Application process? SDC as a student
Offerings at SDC internship facility and
would need to be would like to expand
reexamined to be in outside the classroom.
alignment with grade
configurations
Technology
equipment loan cycle
NURSES 2 nurses at each 7-12 Staff reduction
schools who could assist (2)
with sub shortage as
needed
COUNSELORS Enrollment equal One school counselor Staff reductions
across buildings? per grade level 7-12 plus
an additional counselor
109
for at risk students and

program oversight
6 elementary counselors
or social workers

Area
CAREER OPTION II Lessen the impact on Exciting PD
PD Strengthen literacy
pathways
FMS SCHOLASTIC # of computers More specialists on site
TECH BASED available during the not spread out so thin
INTERVENTION day may be an issue across the district
specifically for Fast
Math, SMI, SRI, Read
180, AIS providers
LITERACY Managing resources Fidelity of CCLS module
and materials implementation
Sustaining literacy Stronger pathways for
focused culture literacy
Transitioning roles of Creation of Director of
Building Literacy ELA K-12
Facilitators in schools CLS and/or coaches could
PD in balanced be located at elementary
literacy (all levels) sites resource to
CCLS, student teachers/admin
engagement
Create a timeline for
resource
management
Balance of ELA focus
within themed
schools
Inventory of student
effectiveness K-12
Training teachers on
STAR assessment
SECONDARY Transitioning student PD that is embedded Less sub $
LITERACY to module based Vertical alignment needed for PD
classrooms More fidelity in done in house
implementation of
literacy program
Peer to Peer collaboration
only in the Title
building
110
lost, the funding

would have to come
from an alternate
source for staff,
materials, supplies
intervention
MS AIS Increase # of All secondary teachers in
students eligible for each building
AIS Vertical alignment of
Shared AIS staff services and curriculum
ELEMENTARY TECH Replication of More access to
existing technology technology in classrooms
at Hoover/Franklin
complex grades 2-5
SECONDARY TECH Lab space in Reduce traditional
secondary schools computer labs with tower
PARCC mandates computer and laptop
IEP Requirements carts use space more
that need technology efficiently
wired accordingly
ELEMENTARY New staff on District Redeploy materials and Savings on
SCIENCE Science Committee supplies materials and
supplies
ELEMENTARY Textbook & supply PD opportunities from Savings on
SOCIAL STUDIES storage + publishing company materials
redistribution More access to
Physical organization technology
+ packing/moving of
materials at each
grade level
Redistribution of
teachers based on
levels
ELEMENTARY MATH Moving materials More consistent approach
(learn from the in a K-6 building
Jefferson move)
UPK How does the Streamlined curriculum If UPK is

themed approach UPK in all buildings eliminated,
involve UPK? offset costs for
other budget
items
DASA Application for Themed schools could Staffing
SAVE themed schools offer educational Building costs
Upper admins role in advancement
transition Expand IB & Tech
programs
111
CONSOLIDATED Closing Holmes Parent involvement

TITLE GRANT would alter Title ELL housed in one
Title I comparability After school programs in
(these buildings one building
should have lowest
students)
Staff reallocation
under Title
issues
Themed building
would potentially be
both specialty school
and Title school
ELL Themed school to ELL all in one elementary Possible
include all ELL building decrease staffing
students
FOCUS SCHOOL Redeployment of Long term attention to Operational
staff, teaching & each student costs
administrative Fewer transitions over
Schools functioning student career
systems (house, Efficient use of
teams, etc.) elementary buildings
Facilities usage Attract new students to
KW will likely have themed schools
more NYS monitored
sub groups
Social emotional
concerns for students
Combined grade level
classes, study halls,
PE, lunches
TWILIGHT Program could continue
at BOCES as is
GED ALP Consistency of Student transition Efficient staff
discipline 7-12 opportunities usage
Staff support system i.e., Efficient
social worker transportation
APPR How would district Student/family buy in Building
support the families would be strengthened maintenance
offended by not for those selected to
getting into the attend first choice school
school/program of
their choice?
PD for themed school
112
SCENARIO K
This is a modified SES Study Group suggested H scenario whereby Kenmore West would be transformed into a
senior high serving grades 10-12, Kenmore East into a junior high serving grades 7-9, and the Hoover and Franklin
complexes in addition to 2 or 3 undetermined elementary schools would serve Grades PK-6. Thereby, closing
Kenmore Middle, closing 2 or 3 undetermined elementary schools, and reducing Ken-Ton to 1 high school. There are
two main transitions for all students and this scenario may reduce up to three (3) school buildings. This would
decrease the likelihood of additional school closings being necessary over the next 5-10 years.
ADMINISTRATION:

KENMORE EAST Fewer athletic and Athletically, Ken-Ton Staffing
other extra-curricular would have more Building operations
opportunities competitive sports
Greater need for teams
shared staffing Exposure to more
9th grade failures very diversity across the
difficult to address district
Connection with
students transitioning
to 10-12 building may
be difficult
KENMORE WEST 9-10 transition may Increased level of Building operations
increase dropout rate maturity in student
Challenge for both 7-9 population
and 10-12 staff to
intimately know
student needs with
many transitions
Reduce access to
athletics
Diminish community
and alumni support
Negatively impact
districts graduation
rate
FRANKLIN MIDDLE Rezoning Vertical alignment Staffing
Community for 7-9, 10-12
acceptance Fewer shared staff
Longer commutes
Retrofit buildings to
meet State Ed
requirements and
scheduling needs
KENMORE MIDDLE Single high school Middle school Big Staffing
would be challenging Picture program
given history, rivalry, Teaming at Jr. High
113
alumni, etc. IB and AP at Jr. High

Longer commutes Less shared staffing
More students in need All change takes
of transportation place at one time
Retrofit the buildings
to meet State Ed
requirements and
scheduling needs
HOOVER MIDDLE Single high school Middle school Big Staffing
would be challenging Picture program
given history, rivalry, Teaming at Jr. High
alumni, etc. IB and AP at Jr. High
Longer commutes Less shared staffing
More students in need All change takes
of transportation place at one time
Retrofit the buildings
to meet State Ed
requirements and
scheduling needs
LINDBERGH Retrofitting space Lessen transitions
Increase class size for students
PD
Curriculum
alignment
socially disadvantaged Full time librarian Building operations
students Less travel teachers Furniture
students with Great consistency in Pre-K run through
disabilities instruction YMCA
teachers based on
certification
class size
transportation
rezoning
large grade span-need
additional
administrators
Accessibility for
parents without
transportation
EDISON Retrofit middle Improved Staffing
schools communication due Building Operations
Restructure to less sites
administration Departmentalize
Physical movement of services such as OT-
materials, supplies, PT-Speech
furniture, equipment
Transportation
Community
114
demographics
HAMILTON Community support of Increased academic Staffing
one high school programs
Effect on testing Outstanding
Transition of performing arts
personnel Highly competitive
Rezoning athletics
Elementary
buildings could be
PK-3 & 4-6
Transportation
efficiency
HOLMES Community concerns Strong pathways Staffing
with allegiance to each and programs Building operations
high school Strong PD
Transportation Return status of
Remodeling some staff to full
Strong 2-3 person time (i.e., social
administrative team workers, librarians)
Managing staffing
transitions &
certifications
FRANKLIN EL Reallocation of staffing Targeted staffing Staffing
Parent concerns Targeted instruction Materials & supplies
Increased class size Redeploy materials
Safety concerns and supplies
Parking/traffic issues
Scheduling issues
Physical space
Additional
administrator needed
HOOVER EL Loss of both 9-12 high Building operations
schools would be very
painful for community
Transportation

Area
FACS Morale school & Exposure to FACS
community tradition at all 3 levels 6th
grade
(Elementary), 7-9
(Jr. High), 10-12
(Sr. High)
ART Morale school & Having one HS -
community tradition increase in
115
available
programs,
electives
LIBRARY Reallocation of some Age level grouping Save $ on programming
library collection for sound appropriate only spend @ 1 high
grade appropriateness school such as IB
space for materials
PE PK-6 Elementary Opportunity to Disbursing
minutes mandate infuse Health, material/supplies/equip
Adaptive PE, ment to active schools
intramural play
day programs
TECH Most difficult scenario
for Tech
classroom/facility space
Need to duplicate
courses @ secondary
buildings (7-9 school
students earn HS credit
as do students in 10-12
school what about
failures?)
LOTE Split checkpoint before Consolidation of
grades 9-10 IB programs to 1
high school
MUSIC Classroom facilities Different musical Less travel teachers
space for small group, ensembles
whole group, ensemble grouped by ability
levels
Potential for
middle school
(BOC) to meet
during day
Create a music
wing @
Hoover/Franklin
BUSINESS Morale school & Maximum class Revenue from sale of
community tradition sizes buildings and staff
Fewer students to reductions
participate in sports
and other activities due
to #s
MATH Reallocation of Vertical
(Elementary) elementary math articulation of
materials curriculum
Greater
opportunity for
teachers to
collaborate on a
daily basis
116
MATH Classroom space Curricular revision

(Secondary) Elective course opportunity
be prioritized
HS courses currently
taught @ each high
school are uniquely
taught (i.e., IB Math
studies 1+2 so will need
to be realigned)
ELA (Elementary) Administrative support Better CLS Reduction in staff
in large complexes support with less
Physical split of buildings to work
elementary buildings K- in
2 in one area 3-6 in
other if possible
Moving materials
ENGLISH National & State IB Program
(Secondary) standards define
secondary as 6-12. This
scenario ignores.
Testing/Assessment
scheduling would be
challenging as 7-8 are
NYS tested and 9 are
not.
Grad credits are
accrued and class rank
based on 9-12 this
model skews that.
Concern for social &
emotional well-being of
students.
SOCIAL STUDIES Assignment of Accelerate course Save on travel teachers
favorite courses to work in 8th grade Less Early Release days
veteran teachers @ secondary level
Materials distribution
to appropriate building
SCIENCE Eliminates Earth Consolidate
Science from the high materials
school experience
SPECIAL Classroom space Increase co taught
EDUCATION IEP Mandates (ex. classes
Separate location for Increase grouping
testing or related differentiation of
services) students
Even more difficult
mixing middle/high
with state, local,
117
regents assessments
with age groupings.
Would grade 9 students
in the 7-9 structure
have access to
accelerated course
work @ the 01 level?
DIRECTORS:

B&G Relocation Full operational Streamline operations
Restaffing of personnel effectiveness of Alternative energy and
and their belongings buildings via lighting sources
Outside consultant capital
necessary expenditures
KMS pool
Physical plan of
HMS/FMS
CHILD NUTRITIION 8th grade would need Consideration of Labor costs
(At this time 40% of to be scheduled meal delivery
students qualify for separately from 9-12 options
free or reduced according to SED Increased
meals. That regulations productivity
number will Time for meal prep
continue to rise as
our enrollment
decreases. A
hungry child cannot
learn.)
zones need to be
assessed
Route times longer
School times
reevaluated
Most middle/high
now
Some middle/high
Determining # of
busses required is
based on a divisor
elementary (66)
students and
middle/high (44)
118
students
Need additional busses
Bell time conflicts
Not enough time
between bus runs
TECH PARCC one device Allow techs to 5 year replacement
per student in the focus on fewer cycle costs
largest grade level buildings
Labs space for, Move wireless
equipment in, cost to access points to
license programs on, open buildings
etc. Standardized
Redeployment of classroom to
equipment, physically house IT
and equitability equipment
Wiring needs Use of Thin client
Network size needs to technology in low
increase level labs &
More work during libraries
second shift hours Updated phone
Scheduling issues system
Need to support Justification to
students and staff after bring tech into
hours student hands,
less lab
ATHLETICS Meshing former AD should be Salary
student rivals into one moved to KW on Transportation
sports program site Materials
Reduction of roster Hire athletic Supplied
slots trainer Equipment
Traditional practice of More competitive
middle schoolers selection process
testing up to high for our coaches
school sports would be One booster club
discouraged for high school
sports
STAFF PK-6 is too broad
DEVELOPMENT Middle school has
CENTER different specials than
elementary students
SDC would need to
reexamine content of
several workshops for
appropriateness at
grade level transitions
Fewer locations to run
trainings
Least productive
scenario for students
119
and learning
NURSES How many elementary Additional nurses Staff reduction (up to
schools? at 10-12 and 7-9 4)
Equality of enrollment schools would
at elementary schools? assist with sub
shortage
COUNSELORS PK-6 buildings HS 7 counselors Staffing reduction
enrollment equal? JH 7 counselors
Elementary
schools 6
counselors
Potential
assistance from
social workers to
serve the district

Area
CAREER OPTION II Long term plan on Strengthen vertical
best use of COII and horizontal
dollars alignment and
instruction
FMS SCHOLASTIC
TECH BASED
INTERVENTION
LITERACY Managing resources Fidelity of CCLS
and materials module
Sustaining literacy implementation
focused culture Stronger pathways
Transitioning roles of for literacy
Building Literacy Creation of Director
Facilitators in schools of ELA K-12
PD in balanced Location of English
literacy (all levels) and AIS teachers
CCLS, student could strengthen
engagement service and
Create a timeline for progress
resource monitoring
management RTI processes could
Inventory of student become more K-12
effectiveness K-12 consistent
Training teachers on
STAR assessment
SECONDARY Vertical alignment More central age Less sub $ needed for
LITERACY Collaboration appropriate PD done in house
between levels at focused literacy
both buildings instruction
120
$ for modules Data driven

materials instruction that
reviews student
work
READING RECOVERY Services provided on
in the Title building
lost, the funding
would have to come
from an alternate
source for staff,
materials, supplies
intervention
MS AIS Increase # of students Vertical alignment Travel teachers
eligible for AIS for 7-9, 10-12
Fewer shared staff
potentially
ELEMENTARY TECH Physical movement Redeployment of
of all technology Technology based
equipment on enrollment
SECONDARY TECH Lab space in Reduce traditional
secondary schools computer labs with
PARCC mandates tower computers
IEP Requirements and laptop carts
that need technology use space more
wired accordingly efficiently
ELEMENTARY New staff on District Redeploy materials Savings in materials
SCIENCE Science Committee and supplies and supplies
ELEMENTARY Textbook & supply PD opportunities Savings on materials
SOCIAL STUDIES storage + from publishing
redistribution company
Physical organization More access to
+ packing/moving of technology
materials at each
grade level
Redistribution of
teachers based on
levels
ELEMENTARY MATH Moving materials K-6 consistent
Storage/labeling approach in one
location
UPK Attendance rates Streamlined If UPK is eliminated,
Which elementary curriculum offset costs for other
buildings? UPK in all buildings budget items
Collaboration
between UPK
teachers
121
DASA Community Teaming at Junior Staffing

SAVE acceptance High Building costs
Longer transportation Less shared staff
routes Increased academic
Junior High programs programs
in regards to
discipline
consequences and
alternative
opportunities
CONSOLIDATED Closing Holmes would Parent involvement
TITLE GRANT alter Title ELL housed in one
Title I comparability After school
(these buildings programs in one
should have lowest building
students)
Staff reallocation
under Title
issues
ELL Room space An ELL teacher in May be able to
each building would decrease staffing
build more
community
FOCUS SCHOOL Greater need for Diversity across Staffing
shared staff between district Utilities
KE & KW May increase level Operational costs
Challenge to address of maturity in
Grade 9 failures student population
Engagement of all 10-
12 students
KW will likely have
more NYS monitored
sub groups
More transitions for
older students may
increase GED or
dropout rate
TWILIGHT A common entrance Create district
Understanding alternative
criteria would need education programs
to be met between all in vacant buildings
staff with excessed staff
Current students no
matter current school
should be given
opportunity to
122
continue in the
program
GED ALP More transitions over Social workers
student career
Less opportunities for
involvement in
activities (more
competition for fewer
spots)
May need more slots
for alternative
learning programs
APPR Class size impact Pressures of middle Grade level funds
school may be consolidated
relieved
ELL bilingual
program
123
TO : Mark Mondanaro
Superintendent of Schools
FROM : Brett A. Banker
Supervisor of Health Services, PE, Recreation & Athletics
REF : Revised Scenarios- J and K
DATE : March 3, 2014
I have examined the projected enrollment figures for both Scenarios J and K. I have considered the data on
both the instructional side and interscholastic. From that research, I have determined that the auxiliary
gymnasium concept, to be located at the current Kenmore East High School, is necessary for both J & K.
Scenario J Grades 7-12 at Kenmore East HS
It appears that all parties can justify the building of an auxiliary gymnasium on campus to account for two
additional grade levels. This add-on/renovation would be necessary for both a quality instructional
(teaching stations) and interscholastic (practice/modified playing site) standpoint.
Scenario K Grades 7-9 at the current Kenmore East complex
Justification for Auxiliary Gymnasium from an Instructional Standpoint
Projected Enrollment of 1,496=500 students in each grade level
**even though Scenario K calls for only three grade levels at the Kenmore East complex, Scenario K does
anticipate having 136 more students than J, with six grade levels.
=20 PE sections per grade or 60 classes every other day or 300 classes in a 2-week block
Current Teaching Stations: 4 stations
Main Gym, Blue Gym (.5), Gold Gym (.5), Pool, Fitness Center
With no expansion the opportunity to instruct team sports is drastically reduced. The 7-9 PE curriculum is
team-sport-centric, making up over 45% of the units taught. Of the four current teaching stations only one
is appropriate from a size and safety standpoint for said instruction. With no additional teaching stations
the team sport themes would drop to 25% of our units taught, class sizes would increase and the lack of
suitable teaching stations would result in classes in Aquatics every day, all year.
The addition of an Aux gym also by design increases locker room space, storage, lockers and office space
for teaching personnel, necessary when you bring in 1,496 students. In addition the number of physical
education sections cited does not accurately depict our need to service the self-contained/BOCES classes.
Obviously when one includes those sections the limited and strained facilities would be further impacted.
124
Expanded Teaching Stations: 4.5 stations
Main Gym, Blue (.5), Aux Gym, Pool, Fitness Center
Justification for Auxiliary Gymnasium from an Interscholastic Standpoint
Scenario K would result in 1,000 7-8th graders in one building. District-wide our middle school students
would be going from three opportunities to participate, for instance, in basketball, to one. The roster spots
would be far more competitive and difficult to earn. For the betterment of the students health and
wellness, well-being, school experience, school climate, connection with their school and their own athletic
development, were going to need to have two levels of modified teams in most sports. Additionally, in the
sport of basketball and possibly 1-2 other sports, it would be prudent for us to consider stand-alone 9th
grade teams.
To that end, an additional auxiliary facility is paramount, especially considering the projected loss of other
off-campus practice sites (elementary sites) during the consolidation.
ADDENDUM
SCENARIO J Grades 7-12 Practice and Game Sites
Kenmore East High School
FALL SPORTS
Sport Level Practice Game
Fball Mod 7-8 Adams Adams
JV Adams Adams
Varsity Adams Adams
XCtr JV/Varsity Community League Sites
Golf JV/Varsity Brighton Brighton
BSoc Mod 7-8 Green Acres Green Acres
JV KE 2 KE 2
Var KE 1 KE 1
GSoc Mod 7-8 Green Acres Green Acres
JV KE 2 KE 2
Var KE 1 KE 1
GSwim JV/Varsity KE Pool KE Pool

125
BVball Mod 7-8 Aux Gym Aux Gym
JV Hoover Elem KE 1
Varsity KE 1 KE1
GVball Mod 7-8 Aux Gym Aux Gym
JV Franklin Elem KE 1
Varsity KE 1 KE1
GTenn Mod KE Courts KE Courts
JV/Varsity Adams Adams
Cheer JV/Varsity 1 remaining themed elementary site
GGym JV/Varsity dropped
FH JV/Varsity dropped
WINTER SPORTS
BBall Mod 7-8 Frank Elem Aux/KE 1 (tripleheaders)
JV Aux KE 1
Varsity KE 1 KE 1
GBall Mod 7-8 Frank Elem Aux/KE 1 (tripleheaders)
JV Aux KE 1
Varsity KE 1 KE 1
Bowl JV/Varsity TBC TBC
Rifle JV/Varsity KE Range KE Range
BSwim JV/Varsity KE Pool KE Pool
WTrack JV/Varsity KE KE
Cheer JV/Varsity 1 remaining themed elementary site
BHoc Varsity Brighton/Lincoln Federation Sites
GHoc Varsity Brighton/Lincoln Lincoln
Wrestl Mod 7-8 HMS Back Gym KE 1
JV/Varsity Blue Gym KE 1

126
SPRING SPORTS
Baseball Mod 7-8 Lincoln 6 Lincoln 6
JV Lincoln 5 Lincoln 5
Varsity Adams Adams
Softball Mod 7-8 Lincoln 1 Lincoln 1
JV Lincoln 4 Lincoln 4
Varsity Lincoln 3 Lincoln 3
BTennis JV/Varsity Adams Adams
Track JV/Varsity Adams Adams
SCENARIO J Grades 7-12 Practice and Game Sites
Kenmore West High School
FALL SPORTS
Fball Mod 7-8 Crosby Crosby
JV Crosby Crosby
Varsity Crosby Crosby
XCtr JV/Varsity Community League Sites
Golf JV/Varsity Sheridan Sheridan
BSoc Mod 7-8 Hoover Elem HMS/KW 2
JV KW 2 KW 2
Var KW 1 KW 1
GSoc Mod 7-8 Hoover Elem* HMS/KW 2
*requires development of field and some fencing at the parcel between playground & Sheridan Drive
JV KW 2 KW 2
Var KW 1 KW 1
127
GSwim JV/Varsity KW Pool KW Pool
BVball Mod 7-8 Old Gym/Hoover El Old Gym
JV KMS KMS
Varsity KW 1 KW 1
GVball Mod 7-8 Old Gym/Hoover El Old Gym
JV KMS KW 1
Varsity KW 1 KW 1
GTennis Mod Hoover El Hoover Elem
JV/Varsity KW KW
Cheering JV/Varsity 1 remaining themed elementary site
Girls Gym JV/Varsity dropped
Field Hockey JV/Varsity dropped
WINTER SPORTS
BBall Mod 7-8 KMS KMS/KW 1 (tripleheaders)
JV Old Gym/Hoover El KW 1
Varsity KW 1 KW 1
GBall Mod 7-8 KMS KMS/KW 1 (tripleheaders)
JV Old Gym/Hoover El KW 1
Varsity KW 1 KW 1
B/G Bowling JV/Varsity Manor Lanes Manor Lanes
Rifle JV/Varsity KE Range KE Range
BSwim JV/Varsity KW Pool KW Pool
Indoor Track JV/Varsity KW KW
Cheering JV/Varsity 1 remaining themed elementary site
BHoc Varsity Brighton/Lincoln Federation Sites
GHoc Varsity Brighton/Lincoln Lincoln
Wrestling Mod 7-8 KMS Upstairs KW Old

128
JV/Varsity Corrective Gym KW Old
SPRING SPORTS
Baseball Mod 7-8 Crosby Crosby*
*Requires re-build of Crosby Diamond
JV Expressway 1 Expressway 1
Varsity Sheridan 1 Sheridan 1
Softball Mod 7-8 Longfellow Longfellow
JV KW KW
Varsity KW KW
Boys Tennis JV/Varsity KW KW
B/G Track JV/Varsity Crosby Crosby
SCENARIO K Practice and Game Sites
Kenmore East Junior High, Grades 7-9
FALL SPORTS
Fball Mod 7-8 Adams Adams
JV Adams Adams
Var Adams Adams
XCtr Mod 7-8 Community League Sites
Golf Mod 7-8 Brighton Brighton
BSoc Mod 7-8A KE 1 KE 1
Mod 7-8B KE 2 KE 2
GSoc Mod 7-8A KE 1 KE 1
Mod 7-8B GA GA
GSwim Mod 7-8 KE Pool KE Pool
BVball Mod 7-8A KE 1 KE 1

129
Mod 7-8B Aux Aux
GVball Mod 7-8A KE 1 KE 1
Mod 7-8B Aux Aux
GTennis Mod 7-8 KE Courts KE Courts
Cheering Mod 8 Aux/Blue Gym 0
Mod 7 Aux/Blue Gym 0
FH Mod 7-8 GA/Sheridan GA/Sheridan
WINTER SPORTS
BBall Mod 7-8A KE 1 KE 1
Mod 7-8B Aux KE 1
9th FE KE
GBall Mod 7-8A KE 1 KE 1
Mod 7-8B Aux KE 1
Bowling Intramural TBC TBC
Rifle No Program
BSwim Mod 7-8 KE Pool KE Pool
Indoor Tr No Program
Cheering Mod 7-8A 1 remaining themed elementary site
Mod 7-8B 1 remaining themed elementary site
BHoc No Program
GHoc No Program
Wrestling Mod 7-8 Blue Gym KE 1
SPRING SPORTS
Baseball Mod 7-8A Lincoln Lincoln
Mod 7-8 B Lincoln Lincoln
9th Adams Adams

130
Softball Mod 7-8A Lincoln Lincoln
Mod 7-8B Lincoln Lincoln
9th Lincoln Lincoln
B. Tennis Mod 7-8 KE Courts KE Courts
Track Mod 7-8 Adams Adams

131
20. Methodology of Scenario Analysis
The Administrative Team with the support of the Board of Education uses the following current class size
guidelines in 2013-2014 to deliver the program. There is no Board Policy or language in the contract with
the Teachers Association that addresses class size.
Minimum Maximum
Kindergarten through Grade 2 22 24
Grades 3 and 4 24 26
Grade 5 26 28
Grades 6 through 8 26 28
Grades 9 through 12* 27 29
*Flexibility is exercised on a case-by-case basis regarding class sizes for highly advanced course
offerings.
Pre-Kindergarten is not specifically addressed. The state-wide class size practice for pre-kindergarten is 18
pupils. There are currently eight Pre-k classes running half day in our school district. All eight classes are
accounted for in the scenario analysis.
The SES Study Team performed an in-depth analysis of our school district building capacities. The links to
that work are here:
http://www.kenton.k12.ny.us/cms/lib/NY19000262/Centricity/Domain/1753/KEN%20TON%20PUPIL%20
CAPACITY.pdf
Those capacities concluded by establishing capacities for the current school year, 2013-2014. For the
purposes of this study, those 2013-2014 capacities became our base year capacities. More specifically,
those capacities are established by State Education Department standards, number of instruction rooms, and
local class section guidelines.
An additional factor to be considered was the districts current use of non-direct instructional class use.
Additional visitations this year with principals generally showed that some of these spaces could be
converted back to direct instruction uses and the team ended up poising 50% usage for each school if it was
needed, but as previously mentioned, none of these seats were utilized.
The next step was to establish revised building capacities by proportionally adjusting any new grade level
configuration section guidelines into the base year capacities. For example, the overall building capacities
for East and West change in scenarios where different grade levels are introduced. Why? Because the
school district class section guidelines vary for these grade levels:
Scenario G 2015-2016 Initiation Year

School PK Grades Min-Max 50% Direct
Capacities Min-Max
West 9-12 1938-2084 27-29
East 9-12 1613-1739 81-87
TOTALS 3551-3823 3659-3939
132
Scenario K 2017-2018 Initiation Year

School PK Grades Min-Max 50% Direct
Capacities Min-Max
West 10-12 1938-2084 27-29
East 7-9 1571-1697 81-87
TOTALS 3509-3781 3617-3897
Note in the above example that the East capacity changed due to the fact that grades 7-8 guidelines differ
from grade 9-12 class section capacities the result lowered the overall capacity. This process was utilized
throughout the final analysis. That final analysis used the arithmetical mean between the minimum and
maximum capacities to not overstate each buildings capacity.
Building choices were made utilizing many factors, some of which may not be obvious. These factors were:
Square footage of building
Current debt
Pupil capacity
Overall condition of building
Geographic location
Current capacity use
Projected capacity use
Ability to draw students currently and projected draw for appropriate grade levels
Impact on nearby attendance zones
Transportation routing impacts
Uniqueness of any geographic areas including ability to draw school aged children
Ability to expand in the future, if necessary
The next step was to input various building inputs PK-12 and run actual student to building loading models
and analyzing the outcome. This was performed numerous times but always for three different years: the
base year (13-14); initiation year (year scenario starts); and a longer range year (19-20).
Adjustments continued to be made until no initiation or 19-20 years had any over capacity grade levels in
any school.
In the final analysis, no buildings were postured at the maximum class section guideline limits, and the 50%
non-direct min-max capacities were never used, so more than enough room for unforeseen and related
planning remained. As you will see in the core recommendation, the team, based on community input
over the years, did not chose to maximize the total number of schools that could be closed.
The following student populated map indicates households with school aged children. The scenario analysis
was based on these actual student placements as schools were either closed or reconfigured during the
analysis phase. It is important to understand that the analysis was therefore based on actual students
residences. The ability to "draw" students to appropriate grade levels and appropriate schools was a
complicated component of the analysis. Sometimes, what would appear either "obvious" on paper or even in
conversation would not necessarily work appropriately when these actual scenarios were run based on the
residences.
133
Cost Benefit Analysis Methodology:

Staffing FTE (full time equivalent) was determined using the same methodology and models that have been
in place for a number of years. Each scenario was modeled independently with enrollment projections
provided by the DecisionInsite software. Current class size guidelines were employed; however, elementary
grades were not maximized to high end of the range. Staffing incorporated current academic programming.
For example, in scenarios where current middle school grades were featured in the high school setting,
staffing was predicted on current middle school staffing. Likewise when 6th grade was placed in the
elementary setting, staffing was projected based on current 6th grade programming. Administrative staffing
was projected using current administrator to student ratios. Support staffing was projected based on current
building staffing and student needs.
This staffing analysis was performed by projecting actual staff into each scenario. Although the estimated
Jefferson Elementary School FTE closing projection impacts warned that actual FTE outcomes could be
different, the team remembered the actual outcome was lower, although still sizable for financial purposes.
(See Section #3) In this project, extra care was taken to not over maximize elementary class sections at the
high end. Additionally, FTE sectioning formulae were adjusted to more accurately project academic special
134
areas, such as art, music, physical education, technology, foreign languages, and family and consumer
sciences. FTE savings are based on legal seniority guidelines.
After running the initial FTE formulation in each scenario, then staff was added back in for special education
and all other program requirements currently running in our school district. Note this method is different
than the one employed by the SES Study Team.
Food Services FTE savings do not directly impact the districts general fund; however, they do affect the
financial health of that department which is supposed to run in the black. We have an excellent Food
Service Department but it has found it much more difficult to run in the black due to new FDA guidelines,
utilization, and rising costs.
Utility savings for closed buildings were part of the cost benefit analysis, but add ins for maintenance and
winter low grade climate control were considered if the schools sale was not imminent.
Capital improvements were also a consideration only if those capital improvements were required, or at least
highly recommended, in order for that particular scenario to work. However, based upon the school districts
current capital reserve fund and state capital aid ratio any such costs did not cause an extra expense directly
to the school district budget.
Finally, transportation impacts were estimated by an analysis of each scenario under our current eligibility
guidelines, into this current base year (13-14 school year). Therefore, it should be noted that actual increases
will be somewhat less as district enrollments continue to drop which all projections indicate. See
transportation cost in next section for more information.
The state transportation aid reimbursement percentage to our school district is 72%, so actual increases to the
budget are greatly reduced. Furthermore, any required resulting bus purchasing is also aidable and the costs
and remaining costs are spread over multiple years.
Therefore, the scenario cost benefit analysis can be depicted this way:
FTE x S + RFTE US + UM + T = One Year Savings
FTE = Full Time Equivalency

S = Scenario
RFTE = Required FTE
US = Utility Savings
UM = Utility maintenance
T = Transportation
Each actual FTE analysis included:
Lowest salary, total salary, med rebate, career option, 7.65% FICA, 17.53% TRS est., 20% ERS est., Health
ins., 403B & 105H, welfare trust, and LIFE
Program Enhancements:
One of the main questions this project was to answer was if reorganization could either restore or enhance
student programming. Where applicable, such suggestions are made. They are made with two very
important pieces of advice to the faculty, Board of Education, and community:
135
1. If one of the scenarios is chosen, enact that scenario before spending too much or any of the savings.
Ensure that the scenario quantifies financial expectation before restorations, or continuously large
restorations are made.
2. Always bear in mind that any of these scenarios is one piece of restoring mid to long range sustainability
components. It is imperative that the district maintains conservative salary and benefit negotiations in order
for true sustainability to be restored.
Budget Unwind Affect:

The team did not quantify the Budget Unwind Affect (BUA) in this project, but BUA calculations and
considerations must be considered as a new non-negative student impact annual budget planning DIU
(Decision Input Unit).
For example, say the district implements an initiation school year scenario of 17-18 where schools x, y, and z
close. What is the technology, maintenance, supplies, and related costs the district would not spend or could
not spend in each annual budget leading up to each closing? This BUA DIU will save annual budget dollars
itself without harming students.
Attrition:
Trending human resource data show that annual employee retirements may increase leading up to and
starting with the scenario initiation years; therefore, attrition may somewhat abate the actual number of
employees who are excessed as a result of any scenario implementation.
Actual FTEs will be different than these scenarios indicate today and FTE reductions would be lessened by
program enhancements, some of which are mentioned at the end of the report.
136
21. Scenario Analysis Findings
FINDINGS, INFERENCES AND OBSERVATIONS BASED ON THE VISITS TO EACH KEN-TON

SCHOOL BUILDING AND THE INTERVIEWS WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE TEAM
SES Study Team 2013
o Charted below is information as to the current school sites:
Perspective: Part 155.1(c) of Commissioners Regulations lists the following minimum usable acres for
school sites unless otherwise approved by the Commissioner.
Elementary schools (kindergarten through sixth grade): 3 acres plus one acre for each 100 pupils, or fraction
thereof.
Secondary schools (seventh through twelfth grade): 10 acres plus one acre for each one hundred pupils, or
fraction thereof.
School: Total Current acres Acres not Architects estimate of how many more classrooms could
acres of now used for used be built on the site reflecting land needed for the added
the school playfields: currently: classrooms and corresponding added playfields, if
building necessary, to meet SED guidelines
site:
Edison 9.01 1.75 0 0-does not meet minimum site standards
Franklin 12.13 2 1.5 18
Building
Hamilton 7.32 1.75 1.5 16
Holmes 3.33 .75 0 0-does not meet minimum site standards
Hoover 18.58 3 1.5 6
Building
Lindbergh 3.09 .5 1.5 0-does not meet minimum site standards
Roosevelt 2.25 1 1 0-does not meet minimum site standards
Kenmore MS 3.85 .75 .5 15 (dependent on Myron Row)
Kenmore East 7.83 3.5 1.5 12
Kenmore 13.66 5 1.5 0-does not meet SED minimum site standards
West
TRANSPORTATION COSTS
There are two major factors that influence transportation functions; time (distance) and capacity. These two
major factors have a direct impact on routing. A tier for transportation program purposes is defined as a
group of schools that share an arrival and/or dismissal time. Currently, we have one less tier for general
education students in the afternoon than we do in the morning. Additionally, it is recommended that the
Board of Education and community consider changing the eligibility limits to match whatever scenario grade
level configuration that is chosen. This analysis did not consider such a change.
A full size bus costs approximately $115,000; however, state aid covers approximately 72% of the real costs,
which are then bonded over a five year period. Non bonded cost increases, fuel, staff, etc., are aided 72% on
an annual basis.
A secondary time change to 7:45am 2:35pm is suggested where you see schedule changes in the scenario
analysis. There are numerous factors still to be considered before accurately determining transportation
impacts.
137
The analysis contains core recommendation concepts regarding some school district buildings and some
guiding principles for the scenario analysis phase itself. These core recommendations influence and are an
additional part of each scenario.
ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS SCENARIO J
Scenario J reconfigures our current high schools into Junior-Senior high schools, grades 7-12 (See Section
14, page 38, Faculty, BOE Member, and Parental Input regarding Two Unique Programs) Successful
Junior-Senior high schools feature separating 7th & 8th graders for at least their academic core classes. Our
architectural and construction management firms along with the high school principals and athletic director
gave input on how to achieve this goal. At Kenmore West, the 7th and 8th graders are placed solely on the
second floor. These students would enter the building from the main Highland entrance which only leads to
the second floor. At the same time, the second floor Guidance suite is moved to the first floor for safety and
functional reasons, a component that the school has wanted to do for many years. Parking is increased at
Kenmore West and a bus bump-in loop off Highland is also suggested.
Moving to Kenmore East, the 7th and 8th graders are isolated to the southern wings of the first and second
floors. Separate bathrooms for this population are also created in these areas. The current blue auxiliary
gym is reconstructed into a full size physical education class gymnasium. A small spectator area is included
and separate locker rooms for the 7th and 8th graders are introduced. Additional parking and some other
classroom improvements on the first floor are made due to the placement of the 7th and 8th graders into some
current classrooms. See the appendix for actual architectural renderings. Estimated construction costs are
included in the scenario analysis section. These costs do not present additional new costs to the school
district as they are more than covered by the district current capital reserve fund.
CORE
A. Buildings:
1. Holmes Elementary School Remains Open: It was noted that the SES Study team postured
Holmes closing in all of its scenarios. In our analysis, it always remains open. Holmes is actually our
newest school and the school district just completed an entire rebuild of its exterior walls and windows. The
attendance zone of the school is also the only physically separated attendance zone covering the entire west
side of our district beyond Military Road. Concerns had also been raised regarding traditional vehicle
ownership capabilities in the zone, and finally, the enrollment projections show an increasing student
enrollment base.
2. Close Kenmore Middle School and Reuse: As weve seen, there are larger under capacity
utilizations particularly in our secondary schools. The continuance of three separate middle schools is not
feasible in terms of sustainability, and two of the middle schools are more geographically positioned to that
population. It is also one of our oldest buildings (1923) and the classrooms are undersized according to
todays standards. However, see part B which follows.
3. Sell Philip Sheridan Building: Place one-time sale revenues of $1.25 million dollars into the
district capital reserve. This leverages the money five-fold for future state aided district capital projects.
Place these programs into vacated 1500 Colvin Boulevard Administration Building Offices:
138
High School Equivalency Program

Staff Development Center
Continuing Education
4. Sell Jefferson Elementary School: Place one-time $750,000 revenue into other district capital
reserve. This leverages the money five-fold for future state aided district capital projects.
5. Maintain Longfellow: The newly constructed Family Support Center is complete and the program
is much better placed for access at this location. Partial athletic use is still necessary.
6. Transportation Building: Completed renovations at this site have worked well and storing and
maintaining the bus fleet at this site has proven to be much better than the Colvin location.
7. Building and Maintenance Shop: The site continues to work well since it was designed for
buildings and grounds purposes. We also recommend maintaining our open drive through from Hoovers
parking lot and having a Hoover access to Colvin due to the increased amount of students.
B. Guiding Principles: Over the past two years literally hundreds of community members and employees
have expressed reorganization thoughts to the Board of Education and Administrative Team in public
forums, Board meetings, phone calls, letters, and email. While it is clearly impossible to meet everyones
expectations and desires, there were emergent concepts that seemed to be mentioned the most and these
guiding principles influenced the analysis and project outcome:
1. Increase our district per pupil capacity utilization but leave flex room if needed in the future.
2. Avoid decimating the neighborhood school concept.
3. Try to keep feeder patterns that make sense.
4. Better utilize current non instructional buildings.
5. Create outcomes that will maintain and enhance student opportunity.
6. Avoid major redistricting twice.
7. Maintain a school district presence in the Village of Kenmore. While Kenmore Middle School
closing as a middle school is part of the CORE recommendations; it is the building always postured
for school district presence in the Village of Kenmore. Due to part 3 which follows, the
recommendation is to move these offices and programs to Kenmore Middle School:
1. District Superintendent of Schools

Curriculum Offices
Student Services Offices, including Special Education
Human Resources
Business and Finance
Community Education Program
ECC Pathways Program
The Big Picture Program
Central Registration
Structured Suspension Program
2. Further investigate offerings through Bryant and Stratton
3. Use gym area as a support to Kenmore West and establish a new district Community
Room
4. Explore other possibilities with the Village of Kenmore
139
District offices were housed in Kenmore Middle School for many years before 1956 when the current
Administration Building was opened on Colvin Boulevard. It would take only local staff effort to reuse the
office spaces on the first floor. At the same time bringing over The Big Picture Program would ensure
aidability of approximately 2.5-3 million dollars of capital improvement work for building upkeep such as
roofs etc., over time. Univent air systems will ensure ability to lower temperatures in unused classrooms to
save operating costs.
TOTAL CORE SAVINGS
A. Gains
2 million of capital reserve revenue (10 million of qualified capital improvement work).
Annual budget expenditure decreases of sold buildings of $30,000 but helps to mitigate rental
revenue loss.
Annual related building maintenance of $150,090 and annual utility costs equal $95,000.
B. Losses
Annual revenue from Philip Sheridan Building:
Sheridan Building Annual Leases (2013-2014)

Buffalo Turners Gymnastics $45,608.44
$3773.73/month - $45,280.44/year + an additional $328 for extra electric usage (A/C)
Blue Giraffe Day Care Center $70,414.88

$5646.24/month - $67,754.88 + an additional $2600 for extra electric usage (A/C)
C. Net gain would equal 10 million of qualified capital improvement work if the sale proceeds are placed in
the districts Capital Reserve, in addition to undetermined annual budget expenses and approximately
$140,000 annually to our school district budget.
In terms of the actual staffing savings following the scenario analysis, it is important to realize current, actual
2013-14 school year seniority lists were utilized. Actual savings may be more or less based upon the actual
initiation year, natural attrition, and other factors.
Each scenario has a detailed per pupil capacity use and percentage based on the current school year, the
initiation year of each scenario, and the 19-20 school year. Attendance zone maps follow each scenario
depicting each schools attendance zone. Finally, a detailed cost benefit analysis is contained in each
scenario.
140
Scenario G Original Charge and Description:
This is a modified SES Study Group suggested G scenario that the districts Focus Group prioritized as a top choice during the Study Groups
June 8, 2013 all day exercise. It calls for the reduction of one elementary school and one middle school but DOES NOT specify which ones,
although Franklin Middle School is likely NOT to be considered for reduction in this scenario. Rezoning of all remaining six elementary schools
would take place and one of the middle school populations would be split into the remaining two. This scenario preserves neighborhood schools
while eliminating one and it reduces the class underutilization percentage in the remaining middle schools. High Schools remain as they are, and
all current grade level configurations remain thus maintaining two major transitions for all students elementary to middle, and middle to high.
This scenario would reduce two (2) school buildings. Current research indicates that enrollment decline is likely to continue, which would result
in additional school closings and redistricting over the next few years.
Initiation Year = 15-16
CORE
Close Hamilton Elementary School
Close Kenmore Middle School
Redistrict Entire District
141
Scenario G - 2015-16 - K-5/6-8/9-12 Schools 2013 9-12

Median 2013-14 Open 2015-16 Open 2019-20 Open 2013-14 2015-16 2019-20 6-8/ K-5
School PK Grades Capacity Geo Proj Seats Geo Proj Seats Geo Proj Seats % Capacity % Capacity % Capacity Enrlmnt
Ken-West HS 9-12 2011 1253 758 1200 811 1129 882 62% 60% 56% 1365
Ken-East HS 9-12 1676 1030 646 954 722 876 800 61% 57% 52% 934
HS Totals 3687 2283 1404 2154 1533 2005 1682 62% 58% 54% 2299
Franklin MS 6-8 828 775 53 741 87 695 133 94% 89% 84% 482
Hoover MS 6-8 1197 858 339 816 381 775 422 72% 68% 65% 575
MS Totals 2025 1633 392 1557 468 1470 555 81% #DIV/0!
77% #DIV/0!
73%
Holmes ES 2 K-5 385 296 89 329 56 358 27 77% 85% 93% 338
Hoover ES 0 K-5 656 645 11 634 22 641 15 98% 97% 98% 584
Roosevelt ES 2 K-5 376 331 45 338 38 368 8 88% 90% 98% 292
Lindbergh ES 0 K-5 588 617 -29 577 11 544 44 105% 98% 93% 534
Edison ES 2 K-5 572 616 -44 570 2 543 29 108% 100% 95% 476
Franklin ES 2 K-5 648 590 58 610 38 637 11 91% 94% 98% 563
ES Totals 8 3225 3095 130 3058 167 2928 134 96% 95% 91%
Note: BOCES classes Base Year:
Roosevelt ES: 1 Hamilton ES: 1
District Totals 8937 7011 1926 6769 2168 6403 2371 78% 76% 72%
142
143
144
145
SCENARIO G - Close Kenmore Middle School, Hamilton Elementary

Summary of Staffing
Reductions Additions due

due to closures to reorg. Final
FTE's FTE's Outcome Savings
KAA -3.5 1 -2.5
KTA -19.6 3 -16.6
KTSEA Full Time-25 0 -25

KTSEA Part Time-38 17 -21
General Fund -86.1 21 -65.1 $ 3,536,604
Lunch Fund
KTSEA FT -2 0 -2
KTSEA PT -7 2 -5
Lunch Fund -9 2 -7 $ 137,433
Note: Lunch fund affects Food Service budget which is not in the general fund budget
146
Transportation
Scenario G
Schedule Schedule
The Same Changes
New Bus Runs 11 11
New Bus Purchases 10 2
Scenario G Cost Benefit Summary
1. Annual general budget year one:

a. Staffing $3,536,594
b. Utilities $ 61,700
c. Budget unwind $ TBD
d. CORE $ 140,000
TOTALS $3,738,304
2. Annual Food Service budget year one: $137,433
3. District per pupil capacity = 76%

147
Scenario I Original Charge and Description:
This is a non SES Study Group suggested scenario whereby each current high school is transformed into a grades 8-12 program, Kenmore Middle
is closed, grades 5-7 replace the current middle school grade configuration at Franklin and Hoover middle schools, and grades PK-4 run at 4 or
5 elementary buildings. Grade 8 being added to the high schools and the grade reconfiguration at the middle school level coupled with the closing
of Kenmore Middle decreases their underutilized space. Rezoning of all remaining elementary schools would take place and the Kenmore Middle
population would be split between Hoover and Franklin. There are two main transitions for all students in this scenario. This scenario may
reduce up to four (4) current school buildings. This would decrease the likelihood of additional school closings being necessary over the next 5-10
years
SCENARIO I
CORE
Close Hamilton Elementary School
Close Roosevelt Elementary School
148
Scenario I - 2016-17 - K-4/5-7/8-12 Schools

(Note: Geographic Projections do not include SDC, PK, or Out of District)
2013-14 2016-17 2019-20 2013-14 2016-17 2019-20 2013 9-12
Median Geo Open Geo Open Geo Open % % % 6-8/ K-5
PK Grades Capacity Proj Seats Proj Seats Proj Seats Capacity Capacity Capacity Enrlmnt
Ken-West HS 8-12 1996 1556 440 1479 517 1441 555 78% 74% 72% 1365
Ken-East HS 8-12 1664 1268 396 1172 492 1074 590 76% 70% 65% 934
HS Totals 3660 2824 836 2651 1009 2515 1145 77% 72% 69% 2299
Franklin MS 5-7 828 849 -21 783 45 760 68 103% 95% 92% 482
Hoover MS 5-7 1197 793 404 712 485 700 497 66% 59% 58% 575
MS Totals 2025 1642 383 1495 530 1460 565 81% 74% 72%
Holmes ES 2 K-4 377 291 86 333 44 343 34 77% 88% 91% 338
Franklin ES 2 K-4 612 539 73 583 29 592 20 88% 95% 97% 563
Hoover ES 3 K-4 624 590 34 589 35 605 19 95% 94% 97% 584
Lindbergh ES 0 K-4 557 581 -24 545 12 550 7 104% 98% 99% 534
Edison ES 1 K-4 546 545 1 491 55 502 44 100% 90% 92% 476
ES Totals 8 2716 2546 170 2541 175 2592 124 94% 94% 95%
District Totals K-12 8401 7012 1389 6687 1714 6567 1834 83% 80% 78%
149
150
151
152
SCENARIO I - Close Kenmore Middle School, Hamilton, Roosevelt

Summary of Staffing
Additions
Reductions due
due to
closures to reorg. Final
KAA -3.5 2 -1.5
KTA -27.55 3.8 -23.75
KTSEA Full Time -30 0 -30

KTSEA Part Time -53 22 -31
General Fund -114.05 27.8 -86.25 $ 4,585,161
Lunch Fund
KTSEA FT -3 0 -3
KTSEA PT -9 4 -5
Lunch Fund -12 4 -8 $ 174,045
153
Transportation
Scenario I
Schedule Schedule
The Same Changes
New Bus Runs 10 10
Scenario I Cost Benefit Summary

d. CORE $ 140,000
TOTALS $4,816,941

154
Scenario J Original Charge and Description:
This is a non SES Study Group suggested scenario whereby each current high school becomes a junior-senior high school grades 7-12. A number
of PK-6 programs run at the Hoover and Franklin complexes and two PK-6 specialty or themed schools would run in two undetermined
elementary schools. This specialty or themed concept recognizes the ongoing struggle to do everything at all school sites. For example, perhaps
International Baccalaureate Primary Years could be implemented for one school as opposed to trying to create the program in 6-7 different
schools. As another example, this concept may also recognize either a geographic or demographic uniqueness in our community. It may be
possible that an application process is used for these themed schools to a degree. Neighborhood elementary schools as a district wide geographic
program would be lessened to a large degree but as many as six separate elementary programs would remain. Grades 7-12 junior-senior high
school is a configuration used throughout the state and this scenario reduces underutilization in our current secondary buildings the most. There
would be one major transition for all students and this scenario may reduce up to four (4) school buildings. This would decrease the likelihood of
additional school closings being necessary over the next 5-10 years
CORE
Close Edison Elementary School
Create Grades 4-6 Primary IB School at Hoover
Reconfigure Hoover Middle School
Reconfigure Franklin Middle School
Reconfigure Ken-West
Reconfigure Ken-East
155
Scenario J - 2017-18 - K-6/7-12 Schools (Note: Geographic Projections do not include SDC, PK, or Out of District)
2013- 2017- 2019- 2013 9-
By 14 18 20 12 6-8/
Median Grade Geo Open Geo Open Geo Open % % % K-5
PK Grade Capacity Level Proj Seats Proj Seats Proj Seats Capacity Capacity Capacity Enrlmnt
Ken-West HS 7-12 1982 1833 149 1689 293 1683 299 92% 85% 85% 1365
Ken-East HS 7-12 1652 1536 116 1360 292 1307 345 93% 82% 79% 934
HS Totals 3634 3369 265 3049 585 2990 644 93% 84% 82% 2299
Hoover ES 2 K-2 585 585 548 37 563 22 563 22 94% 96% 96%
3 213 164 49 174 39 182 31 77% 82% 85%
Hoover ES 853
4-6 639 566 73 434 205 435 204 89% 68% 68% 584
Hoover K-6 Total: 1437 1278 159 1171 266 1180 257 89% 82% 82%
Hoover IB** 4-6 300 300 0 300 282 18 284 16 0% 94% 95%
Franklin ES 2 K-2 663 663 427 236 448 215 445 218 64% 68% 67%
3 181 156 25 151 30 155 26 86% 21% 86%
Franklin ES 725 563
4-6 544 428 116 323 221 338 206 79% 59% 62%
Franklin K-6 Total: 1388 1011 377 922 466 938 450 73% 66% 68%
2 K-2 165 141 24 156 9 154 11 85% 95% 93%
Holmes Exp LS* 3 385 55 43 12 51 4 54 1 78% 93% 98%
338
4-6 165 100 65 100 65 111 54 61% 60% 67%
Holmes K-6 Total: 385 284 101 307 78 319 66 74% 80% 83%
K-2 194 172 22 173 21 172 22 89% 38% 89%
Hamilton ES 453 319
3 65 65 0 54 11 54 11 100% 83% 83%
156
4-6 194 226 -32 144 50 139 55 116% 74% 71%

Hamilton K-6 Total: 453 463 -10 371 82 365 88 102% 82% 80%
2 K-2 252 256 -4 229 23 226 26 102% 91% 90%
Lindbergh ES 3 588 84 87 -3 76 8 74 10 104% 90% 88%
4-6 252 261 -9 201 51 189 63 104% 80% 75% 534
Lindbergh K-6
Total: 588 604 -16 506 82 489 99 103% 86% 83%
ES Totals: 8 4552 4551 3640 911 3559 992 3574 977 80% 78% 79%
District Totals: 8 8186 7009 1176 6608 1578 6564 1622 86% 81% 80%
* Holmes Expeditnry Lrng Schl Estimated percent of total 4-6 enrollment for
Hoover 4-6 Primary IB from Franklin, Hoover,
Hamilton, Holmes and Lindbergh elementary 19% 19%
** Hoover 4-6 Primary IB schools:
Hamilton ES:
Note: BOCES classes Base Year: Roosevelt ES: 1 1
157
158
159
SCENARIO J - Close Kenmore Middle School, Edison, Roosevelt

Summary of Staffing
Additions
Reductions due
due to
KAA -6 3 -3
KTA -38.1 5.4 -32.7
KTSEA Full Time -30 2 -28

KTSEA Part Time -50 21 -29
$
General Fund -124.1 31.4 -92.7 6,303,563
Lunch Fund
KTSEA FT -3 0 -3
KTSEA PT -10 4 -6
$
Lunch Fund -13 4 -9 185,127
160
Transportation
Scenario J
Schedule Schedule
The Same Changes
New Bus Runs 19 19
Scenario J Cost Benefit Summary

d. CORE $ 140,000
TOTALS $6,544,221
4. Capital Improvements (Fully aidable)

161
162
Scenario K Original Charge and Description:
This is a modified SES Study Group suggested H scenario whereby Kenmore West would be transformed into senior high serving grades 10-12,
Kenmore East into a junior high serving grades 7-9, and the Hoover and Franklin complexes in addition to 2 or 3 undetermined elementary
schools would serve Grades PK-6. Thereby, closing Kenmore Middle, closing 2 or 3 undetermined elementary schools, and reducing Ken-Ton to
1 high school. There are two main transitions for all students and this scenario may reduce up to three (3) school buildings. This would decrease
the likelihood of additional school closings being necessary over the next 5-10 years
SCENARIO K
CORE
Close Edison Elementary School
Reconfigure Ken-West
Reconfigure Ken-East
163
Scenario K - 2017-18 - K-2/3-6/K-6/7-9/10-12 Schools

(Note: Geographic Projections do not include SDC, PK, or Out of District) 2013 9-
2013- 2017- 2019- 2013-14 2017-18 2019-20 12 6-8/
Median 14 Geo Open 18 Geo Open 20 Geo Open % % % K-5
PK Grades Capacity Proj Seats Proj Seats Proj Seats Capacity Capacity Capacity Enrlmnt
Ken-West HS (X) 10-12 2011 1719 292 1553 458 1508 503 85% 77% 75% 1365
Ken-East HS (X) 7-9 1634 1650 -16 1496 138 1482 152 101% 92% 91% 934
HS Totals 3645 3369 276 3049 596 2990 655 92% 84% 82% 2299
Hoover ES (C) 2 K-2 585 543 42 558 27 557 28 93% 95% 95%
Hoover ES (C) 3-6 1153 721 432 698 455 706 447 63% 61% 61% 584
Hoover K-6 Total: K-6 1738 1264 474 1256 482 1263 475 73% 72% 73%
Franklin ES (E) 2 K-2 663 440 223 460 203 457 206 66% 69% 69%
Franklin ES (E) 3-6 725 626 99 581 144 602 123 86% 80% 83% 563
Franklin K-6 Total: K-6 1388 1066 322 1041 347 1059 329 77% 75% 76%
Holmes ES (W) 2 K-6 385 303 82 352 33 370 15 79% 91% 96% 338
Lindbergh ES (S) K-6 588 604 -16 553 35 533 55 103% 94% 91% 534
Hamilton ES (N) 2 K-6 453 407 46 360 93 353 100 90% 79% 78% 319
K-2
K-3 Totals: 1248 983 265 1018 230 1014 234 79% 82% 81% Totals:
3-6
4-6 Totals: 1878 1347 531 1279 599 1308 570 72% 68% 70% Totals:
K-6
ES Totals: 8 4552 3644 908 3562 990 3578 974 80% 78% 79% Totals:
District Totals K-12 8197 7013 1184 6611 1586 6568 1629 86% 81% 80%
164
165
SCENARIO K - Close Kenmore Middle School, Edison, Roosevelt

Summary of Staffing
Additions
Reductions due
due to
KAA -6 3.4 -2.6
KTA -48.8 3.7 -45.1
KTSEA Full
Time -30 2 -28
KTSEA Part
Time -50 21 -29
$
General Fund -134.8 30.1 -104.7 6,235,027
Lunch Fund
KTSEA FT -3 0 -3
KTSEA PT -10 4 -6
Lunch Fund -13 4 -9 $ 185,127
166
Transportation
Scenario K
Schedule Schedule
The Same Changes
New Bus Runs 14 14
Scenario K Cost Benefit Summary

d. CORE $ 140,000
TOTALS $6,475,685
4. Capital Improvements (Fully aidable)

167
168
Enhancements to Student Programs
The key to any district reorganization success is to stabilize the district financial plan, get tax rates under control, and enhance student opportunity.
If the school district chooses to enact a scenario, the importance of realizing the actual financial gain cannot be stressed enough.
Preserving the allowable 4% Fund Balance, taking down the Appropriated Annual Fund Balance to around five million dollars annually and
eliminating the annual budget gaps are paramount for the school districts health and success.
As weve seen, remaining resources should be used and leveraged five-fold in the Capital Reserve and maintain and improving remaining
buildings will be more doable and affordable.
Secure in the above findings, steps should be taken to reintroduce or introduce the following programs:
SCENARIO PROGRAMS
G Reading Recovery
I Reading Recovery, Learning Center/AIS with a well-designed plan, Spring middle school athletics
J All above, plus Primary Years IB and Middle Years IB
K All above, plus Primary Years IB and Middle Years IB
Ongoing conservative salary and benefit negotiations must continue and the fairly new established practices of close budget monitoring will need
to continue, as well as an ongoing capital improvement and maintenance program.
It is imperative that the school district quantifies and realizes any true financial gains before considering larger enhancements of class size
reduction or actual junior high teaming.
We believe the school district has a chance to fulfill its 2020 vision to operate effectively and efficiently beyond 2020.
169
APPENDIX
Kenmore East and Kenmore West Scenario J Architectural Renderings
2.28.78 Handwritten School District Enrollment and School Building Data
Town Zone Map
Village Zone Map
Acknowledgements
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
http://www.tonawanda.ny.us/DocumentCenter/Home/View/304
178
http://www.villageofkenmore.org/images/pdfs/villagezoning.pdf
179
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
90 Community and Staff members of the Focus Group
Board of Education
Bob Dana, President
Stephen Brooks, Vice-President
Judy Frank, Trustee
Todd Potter, Jr., Trustee
Jeff Rickan, Trustee
Administrative Leadership Team

Stephen Bovino
Alan Erzkus
Gerry Stuitje
Robin Zymroz
Elementary Principals
David King, Edison
Patricia Kosis, Franklin
Michael Huff, Hamilton
Lisa Cross, Holmes
Fran Paskowitz, Hoover
Michael Muscarella, Lindbergh
Tracy Spagnolo, Roosevelt
Middle School Principals

Kevin Kruger, Franklin Middle
Carmelina Persico, Hoover Middle
Elaine Thomas, Kenmore Middle
High School Principals

Patrick Heyden, Kenmore East
Dean Johnson, Kenmore West
Junior/Senior High (7-12) Meeting Participants

Stephen Brooks
Chris Cavarello
Marie Crosby
Bob Dana
Judy Frank
Matt Gourlay
Dick Harned
Kelly Loss
Shane Magaris
Annette Mitchell
Susan Mitchell
Jennifer Morrow
Nicole Pauly
180
Ann Santiago
Paul Spors
Dawn Stinner
Pat Veltri
Gennie Vitko
Amie Wager
Karen Whitelaw
Themed Elementary School Meeting Participants

Stephen Brooks
Lisa Carver
Bob Dana
Judy Frank
Diane Hyzy
Brian Kopper
Paul Spors
Mary Wedgewood
Karen Whitelaw
Erie 1 BOCES
JoAnn Balazs
James Fregelette
Curriculum Learning Specialists

Art Amy Veltri
Business Nancy Pray
ELA Elementary Marybeth Emons-Joy
ELA Secondary Jennifer LaManna
FACS Amy Donn
Health/PE Heather Ratka
Library Nancy ODonnell
LOTE John Carlino
Math Elementary Jennifer Ertel
Math Secondary Dawn Brown
Mental Health Professionals Bettymarie Sullivan
Music Laura Anderson
Science Timothy Contangelo
Social Studies Mary Lynn Bieron
Special Education Elementary Shari Stahl
Special Education Secondary Lisa Chimera
Technology Joel Maerten
IB
Vanessa Scinta
181
Administrative Special Assignments

AIS Remedial Programs Elementary Fran Paskowitz
AIS Remedial Programs Middle School Kevin Kruger
AIS Remedial Programs High School Christopher Ginestre
Career Option II Barb Battaglia
Consolidated Title Grant Dave King
DASA/SAVE Kami Halgash
District Calendar Michael Haggerty
District Wellness Committee Brett Banker
Elementary Tech Committee Chair Michael Muscarella
ESL & Title III Michelle Jaros
Focus School Patrick Heyden, Dean Johnson
GED/ALP Articulation Christine Koch
Math Elementary Michael Muscarella
Pre-K Michael Huff
Reading Recovery Patricia Kosis
Science Elementary Patricia Kosis
Secondary Tech Committee Chair Michael Haggerty
Social Studies Elementary Tracy Spagnolo
Literacy Elementary Lisa Cross
Literacy Secondary Carmelina Persico, Elaine Thomas
Scholastic Tech Based Interventions Dan Charland
Twilight Program Liaison Joe Greco
Directors
Elaine Altman Staff Development Center
Brett Banker - Athletics
Barbara Battaglia Data & Research
Jack Burns - Transportation
Jeff Hatten Buildings & Grounds
JoAnn Mendola, Marty Wende Technology
Kim Roll Food Services
Gordon W. Jones Associates, Architects

Steve DiMatteo
Scott Jones
John Ticco
Campus Construction
Tom Caruso
Carrie Preston
Mark Vorhees
DecisionInsite
Tony Ferruzzo
Bruce Terry
Dean Waldfogel
182
Jennifer Cawley, Supervisor for Curriculum & Instruction
Denise Crowley, Principal Clerk Typist
Christine Ljungberg, District Clerk and Director of Negotiations
Angela Roach, Senior Clerk Typist
Diane Voght, Chief Accountant
Gina Walck, Secretary to the Superintendent
The hundreds of community members and employees

who have given us feedback for almost two years

Consolidation Final Report - 20-14 Rev PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Consolidation Final Report - 20-14 Rev PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Consolidation Final Report - 20-14 Rev PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2014

PRE-KINDERGARTEN THROUGH GRADE 12

CONTAINED HEREIN IS THE ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS OF

1500 Colvin Boulevard

1. Our District Through the Years

The closing of a school is a dramatic event in a school community. The Kenmore-Town of

WHY ARE SCHOOLS BEING CLOSED?

FACILITY GRADES YEAR CLOSED

Mann K-6 1976

District Enrollment 2013-14 Total Buildings

2. Grade Configuration Research Review

2. Clearly Stated and Focused Mission

3. Safe and Positive Environment

4. High Expectations for ALL Students

5. Frequent Monitoring of Student Progress

6. Maximize Learning Opportunities

7. Positive Communication -School, Home, Community

3. Projected Jefferson Elementary School Savings

All personnel = $1,671,210 (salary and benefits)

4. Private School Choice Historical Trends

We have followed trends of our non-public enrollment percentages:

5. Taxes, Taxes, Taxes!

7. Reuse of Buildings and Historical Valuation Data

Jane Addams School; Sold in 2005

Brighton School; Sold in 2009

Green Acres School; Closed 2012

Net Gain of These Transactions

No major changes in Values

Issue with sales from

No major changes in Values

8. Open Enrollment Implications

9. Deficient Building Conditions

SES Study Team (2013)

KENMORE-TOWN OF TONAWANDA SCHOOL TOTAL DISTRICT ESTIMATED COST GROSS BUILDING SQ FT

10. Capital Debt Owed on District School Buildings

School Operating Capacity Operating Capacity Debt

11. Solar and Wind Energy Enhancements

Gov. Cuomo Launches Solar Schools Program for NY

12. Reconciliation of Unanswered SES Study Team Findings & Suggestions

Current Scheduling Practices:

Teachers Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday 6 Monday

Franklin 218 880 Reading Room 18 - 28

Hamilton 109 794 Reading Room 18 - 28

Holmes 209 792 Reading Academic Intervention 18 - 28

Hoover 247 768 Math Academic Intervention/Gifted and Talented 18 - 28

Lindbergh 202 726 Math Academic Intervention/Gifted and Talented 18 - 25

Roosevelt 212 753 Remedial Rooms 18 - 26

Hoover 206 943 Student Support Room 26 - 28

Franklin 151 788 In School Suspension 26 - 28

Estimated Potential Added Middle School Building Pupil Capacity if Needed:

Kenmore 309 1647 Academic Achievement Center 27 - 29

West HS 325 825 ESL 27 - 29

Estimated Potential Added High School Building Pupil Capacity if Needed:

3. SES Study Team (2013) Class Size Equity

13. Shared Staff Real Cost Savings from SES Findings

Distance Between Buildings (SES Study Team 2013)

ROOSEVELT 3.75 3.5 4.25 1.5 2.25 1.5

LINDBERGH 2 2 4.25 2 2.75

HOLMES 3.75 4.75 4.25