PUSD Board’s ‘Transformation’ Meeting Ends With Closure Questions Still Unresolved

The Pasadena Unified School District Board of Education spent nearly six hours Thursday, August 13, in a special meeting focused on defining the district’s “transformation” process, but discussions repeatedly returned to the possibility of school closures and consolidations.

By Margaret Prieto

The meeting, which began with trustees seated around a round table, was facilitated by Natalia Guerra of Collaborate PASadena. Guerra led trustees and members of the district’s senior leadership team through a series of exercises intended to establish a shared vision for the future of PUSD.

The session was initially understood by some attendees to be a study session before it was converted into a special meeting with action items. The board is restarting its school-closure process under Resolution 2894.

Throughout the evening, trustees differed over whether the discussion should focus primarily on defining the district’s future and rebuilding trust with the community, or on the data and criteria that could eventually be used to determine which schools remain open.

During an exercise on how trustees felt about the process, Superintendent Elizabeth Blanco said the board needed to “discuss the why before the what,” arguing that understanding why decisions are being made would lead to a stronger district.

Student representative Lula Matsurra read a statement from a student who had participated in the earlier Superintendent’s School Consolidation Advisory Committee, saying consultants did not understand the culture of the district and attempted to control the conversation.

Trustee Michelle Richardson Bailey said Resolution 2852 had set the tone that schools were already slated for closure and that the process was simply taking participants through the motions.

Trustee Jennifer Hall Lee expressed frustration over frequent 4-3 splits. “We need to be able to collaborate. Instead, we created chaos, sadness and stress for parents and students, and this upsets me,” Hall Lee said. “It shouldn’t be difficult to keep kids in public schools, and we are driving them away.”

Trustee Patrice Marshall McKenzie said, “Until we build trust, we are not in a position to ask for trust.”

Students and parents press board on closures

Public commenters repeatedly raised concerns that the district’s discussion of closures was already affecting enrollment and driving families away.

Sierra Madre Mayor Kristine Lowe said that closing schools does not constitute transformation. Drawing on her experience as an educator, Lowe said studies show schools that close lose nearly 300 students, along with revenue, and that those students do not return.

Lowe also said Glendale Unified School District gained approximately 80 Pasadena Unified students following the Eaton fire and that those students are staying. She urged PUSD to establish “stability, vision and trust.”

Parent Dawn Denison pointed to Thurgood Marshall Secondary School’s 98% graduation rate and said schools producing strong results should not be closed.

Blair parent Denise Robb said Blair had maintained consistent attendance for years but lost approximately 140 students this year amid discussion of closures. She said many of those students came from outside the district and opted out of PUSD altogether.

Robb called for all schools to be removed from the potential closure list and urged trustees to listen to student trustees and the Student Assembly.

Felita Kealing, who works in marketing at Thurgood Marshall, said it had been 70 days since the previous board meeting and that the new school year was only four days away. Instead of preparing for the school year, she said she had spent the summer reassuring anxious parents.

“Our student loss is a direct effect of the Board’s actions,” Kealing said.

She said she called 85 families during the summer and then read the first names of members of the 2026 eighth-grade class who are leaving Marshall because of concerns about consolidation. Several people in the audience became emotional.

Emma Green told trustees, “You can’t build enrollment by making families afraid.”

Principal Lori Toloumian presented the board with a U.S. News & World Report award recognizing Marshall as the No. 1-ranked school in PUSD.

Parent Sara Poggi criticized Trustee Tina Fredericks and her attorney over a legal letter she said threatened her livelihood and described the effect of the resulting stress on her children. Poggi also addressed Trustee Kim Kenne, noting that Kenne had served on the board longer than Poggi’s oldest son had been alive and assigning her responsibility for existing budget problems.

The only public comment supporting closure came from Muir High School Athletic Director Alfredo Resendiz, who cited a lack of information-technology support at school sites following budget cuts. Resendez described the situation as creating “skeletal schools” and said Muir’s principal would now be providing Chromebook support.

Debate over data and the meaning of transformation

During a “reflect” exercise, student representative Lula Matsurra delivered one of the evening’s clearest appeals for student participation.

Matsurra said she had spoken with fellow think tank members about how they define transformation and found a common theme: “clearer communication and collaboration.” Students, she said, want their ideas to be “heard, not just listened to by the board.”

She urged trustees to “look outside the box and find all the opportunities,” saying students also want clearer communication between the board and Pasadena residents and want to hear the facts. She said the district should also ensure that “the positives” are communicated by the district and media.

When asked what transformation means to students, Matsurra offered a direct answer: “When we ask ourselves what transformation is, it is not consolidating schools, it is redefining our district.”

Hall Lee said the district had already closed 11 schools and had not adequately discussed what public education means for the community.

“Let’s get out of the ‘80s and into the 21st century,” Hall Lee said, questioning how PUSD could provide the small schools and small classes that community members say they want.

She also argued that the word “transformation” had become so broad that it no longer had meaning.

Marshall McKenzie said the district had just experienced a tragedy and called discussions affecting school stability “callous.” She said the community needed to be involved in determining its future and that the district had made significant cuts in the fall without yet knowing their effects.

“Without knowing our new baseline, we are acting without data,” she said.

Fredericks focused on demographic projections, citing the loss of 400 to 500 students annually and saying that amounted to “a whole school.”

When trustees began ranking potential data sets to guide the transformation process, Bailey said the district had not yet established a vision, goals or completed a self-evaluation for the new school year.

She questioned whether ranking data at that point was responsive to students, families and the community.

During the exercise, Fredericks added a list of schools to a working document under one of the proposed criteria. The list appeared to correspond with schools that had been under consideration during the earlier 2026 consolidation process.

Hall Lee also called for state data and a Stanford study to be included in the discussion. She said trustees serve as community liaisons and “we don’t ignore students, we don’t ignore parents.”

Board agrees on committee structure

As the meeting approached 11:00 pm, Guerra said the session was running behind schedule and modified the planned outcomes, eliminating a vote on some issues and moving toward defining a committee structure.

Three structures were discussed: a board subcommittee, a committee of the full board, or a community committee.

Matsurra proposed eight student representatives—two from each school—and seven community members for a 15-person community committee. She said the Student Assembly was concerned that some scenarios provided for only one or two students, which she said would not adequately value student input.

Marshall McKenzie cautioned against confusing the transformation process with the district’s master education plan and work already underway.

The board ultimately agreed to establish a committee of the full board.

Yarma Velázquez made the motion, with Scott Harden seconding it. Patrice Marshall McKenzie offered an amendment clarifying that the committee would initially allow the board to define the work of transformation and that the committee format could be reconsidered after a baseline was established.

The amendment was accepted, and the board approved the item 6-1, with Jennifer Hall Lee voting against it.

The discussion remained divided, however, with some trustees continuing to raise consolidation questions while others emphasized rebuilding trust and establishing a baseline before making decisions.

The board ultimately voted 7-0 to table all remaining action items.

The meeting ended at 11:59 pm.

By the end of the session, the board had agreed to continue the transformation process, but the evening also exposed the unresolved divide over what that process should mean. Some trustees emphasized rebuilding trust and listening to students and families, while others continued to focus on enrollment decline, data and the possibility of consolidation.