FAQ

Parchment School District spent approximately two years developing its 2026–2031 Strategic Plan. The process included analysis of district data, stakeholder input, staff and community conversations, and examination of the systems and structures necessary to support student success.

The Strategic Plan identifies six areas of focus:

1. Student Achievement

2. Culture, Climate & Belonging

3. Communication, Trust & Pride

4. Staff Excellence

5. Facilities & Operations

6. Fiscal Responsibility

The Strategic Plan and the facilities proposal are related, but they are not the same thing. The Strategic Plan establishes what the district is working toward educationally and organizationally. The bond proposal addresses the physical spaces, infrastructure, and facilities needed to support that work.

Michigan school districts cannot use bond proceeds to pay for ordinary operating expenses such as employee salaries or routine maintenance. Bond funds are intended for capital expenditures.

The proposed facilities plan therefore looks at a broader question than simply, "What buildings need to be repaired?"

It asks:

How should Parchment use its buildings, facilities, and available resources to support students today and over the next several decades?

The district is maintaining enrollment data and projections to help inform both educational and facilities planning.

Enrollment is particularly important when considering facilities because buildings are long-term investments. The number of students we serve, the grades in which they are enrolled, and projected future enrollment all influence decisions about classroom capacity, staffing, transportation, and the number of buildings the district can reasonably operate.

Yes. Parchment's enrollment trends reflect broader demographic trends occurring throughout Michigan, including declining birth rates. Here is a graph that represents both the enrollment trends over the years, and the expected trend in the upcoming years.

Importantly, enrollment does not affect only the number of students in classrooms. It also affects:

• Number of sections
• Class sizes
• Staffing needs
• Transportation
• Building utilization
• Maintenance costs
• Utility costs
• Capital needs
• Program efficiency

This is one reason the district is evaluating its overall facility footprint rather than simply repairing every existing building in its current configuration.

The district will continue evaluating its facility footprint regardless of the outcome of the bond proposal. The need to evaluate the district's facility footprint is driven by enrollment, facility condition, operating costs, and long-term financial sustainability.

If the bond is approved, the proposed capital improvements would provide a specific pathway for restructuring the district's facilities, including new instructional space and improvements to the buildings that would remain operational.

If the bond is not approved, the district would still need to address aging facilities, capital needs, and the cost of maintaining its current footprint. The options available to the district would be different.

The 2025 proposals focused primarily on addressing facility needs within the district's existing building configuration.

The November 2026 proposal takes a different approach.

The district's May 2025 proposal was $36.4 million and the November 2025 proposal was $32.35 million. The November 2026 proposal is $41 million, but the significant difference is not simply the dollar amount.

The current proposal asks a broader facilities question:

Rather than continuing to maintain the same number of aging buildings, how can the district restructure its facilities to better match enrollment, reduce the number of buildings it operates, address critical infrastructure needs, and create spaces that support future programming?

The current proposal therefore combines:

• Facility consolidation
• New instructional space
• Critical infrastructure improvements
• Safety and security improvements
• Technology
• Site improvements
• Improved utilization of existing district property

The proposal is intended to address both immediate facility needs and long-term facility planning.

The district did not develop the current proposal from a single facility assessment.

The planning process considered information from multiple studies and sources, including:

• 2019 OAK Facility Assessment
• 2023 OAK/TowerPinkster Facility Assessment updates
• Honeywell Energy Audits — April 2024 and February 2025
• Statewide Facilities Utilization Study — Spring 2024
• Facilities Management Consultation with WMERF — Spring 2024
• EpicMRA community survey — Spring 2024
• School Finance Research Foundation Study — March 2025
• Energy Harness Audit — April 2025 
  • [PIC] · [North] · [Northwood] · [Central] · [HS] · [MS]
• Enrollment and demographic projections
• Operational and maintenance considerations
• Community and stakeholder feedback

The challenge of aging school infrastructure is not unique to Parchment. The State of Michigan has also documented significant infrastructure needs statewide. The statewide facilities study referenced by MDE identified nearly $23 billion in school infrastructure needs over ten years.

Approval of the bond would not mean that every architectural detail has already been finalized. The Bond Steering Committee established the overall direction and scope.

The next phase would involve detailed planning and design. The district anticipates a comprehensive planning process during which stakeholders could provide input regarding:

• Building design
• Instructional spaces
• Student services
• Grade-level programming
• Athletics
• Fine arts
• Transportation
• Traffic flow
• Site design
• Safety and security
• Community use
• Operational efficiencies

The goal would be to move from a broad facilities plan to a detailed design that reflects the district's educational priorities and community needs.

Yes.

The bond proposal establishes the financial authorization and overall project scope. It does not mean every design decision has already been made. A substantial amount of planning remains.

Community, staff, and stakeholder input would be particularly valuable during the design and implementation phase because decisions about room configuration, programming, traffic flow, site design, and shared spaces will need to be translated into actual building plans.

The proposal is addressing several connected challenges rather than one isolated problem.

1. Aging infrastructure

The district has significant needs involving HVAC, roofing, electrical systems, safety systems, and other building infrastructure.

2. Enrollment changes

Enrollment has declined over time, particularly in younger grades, creating a need to reconsider how much building capacity the district maintains.

3. Facility operating costs

Every building requires utilities, maintenance, custodial services, repairs, insurance, and long-term capital investment.

4. Program space

Some existing facilities limit the district's ability to provide programming efficiently because spaces must serve multiple purposes.

5. Long-term planning

The district needs a facilities configuration that can be maintained over decades rather than repeatedly responding to individual building failures.

6. Educational opportunities

New and reconfigured spaces can provide opportunities for specialized instruction, athletics, career preparation, collaboration, and student support that are difficult to create within some existing buildings.

The proposal therefore represents a facilities and capital plan, but the decisions are ultimately connected to how the district delivers educational opportunities to students.

Established by the current proposal:

• The maximum bond authorization is $41 million.
• The proposal includes additions, renovations/equipment, instructional technology, and site improvements.
• The plan contemplates consolidation of district facilities.
• The plan includes a new 7th–8th grade wing at the high school campus.
• The plan contemplates Northwood serving K–2.
• The plan contemplates North serving grades 3–6.
• The plan contemplates Central serving early childhood and administration.
• The Middle School would no longer operate as a separate school building if the proposed configuration is implemented.

To be developed through planning and design:

• Exact classroom configurations
• Specific room assignments
• Final traffic patterns
• Detailed site design
• Final location of relocated outdoor facilities
• Shared-use schedules
• Administrative structures
• Detailed construction phasing
• Final architectural finishes and furnishings
• Detailed programming within individual spaces

This distinction is important because the bond establishes a framework and financial authorization; it does not eliminate the need for thoughtful planning after the election.

The central question for the Steering Committee was not simply:

"How do we fix our old buildings?"

It was:

"What configuration of buildings will best serve Parchment students and the community over the long term, given our enrollment, facility condition, educational needs, and financial resources?"

The committee considered:

• Immediate facility needs
• Long-term maintenance
• Enrollment projections
• Building condition
• Energy efficiency
• Operational costs
• Educational programming
• Community input
• Debt
• Future capital needs
• The potential to repurpose existing district assets

The result is a proposal that combines facility investment with facility consolidation.

That distinction is central to understanding the November 2026 proposal.

Our greatest educational need is ensuring that every child is in school, supported, and growing academically and socially every day.

That requires strong instruction, caring relationships, effective systems, appropriate interventions, and partnership between schools, families, and the community.

The community can help by:

• Encouraging regular attendance
• Supporting students and families
• Volunteering and mentoring
• Sharing community resources
• Creating work-based learning and career opportunities
• Supporting student activities and enrichment
• Partnering with schools on programs and events
• Providing feedback and participating in district planning

Strong schools depend on strong relationships between schools, families, and the broader community.

The district has engaged in multiple processes to analyze student achievement data and identify contributing factors. Several themes have emerged and are reflected in the Strategic Plan.

School readiness

Some students are entering kindergarten with fewer foundational skills than in previous years. Additionally, some students do not enter a traditional school setting until first grade or later, including students who have been homeschooled or participated in virtual programs.

To address this, the district has expanded partnerships and access to early learning opportunities, including GSRP and KC Ready 4s.

Post-COVID engagement and achievement

Following the COVID-19 pandemic, the district saw significant declines in engagement and measured proficiency, particularly at the secondary level.

The district's response includes renewed attention to instructional consistency, assessment, intervention, attendance, student engagement, and school improvement planning.

Staff recruitment, retention, and capacity

The district has experienced a significant number of retirements and other staffing changes over the past several years.

In response, Parchment has expanded partnerships with teacher development programs, implemented mentoring for new teachers, and partnered with Kalamazoo RESA to provide coaching and individualized support for new educators.

More than 30 staff members celebrated their fifth anniversary with the district this past year, reflecting progress in retaining newer members of our staff.

The Strategic Plan includes measurable goals around student achievement, MTSS, Tier I instruction, assessment, K–12 alignment, staff development, and continuous improvement.

The district is also developing stronger systems for monitoring progress so that student achievement is not measured only once a year, but is monitored throughout the year and used to adjust instruction and intervention.

Improving achievement requires more than one initiative or one program.

The district's approach includes:

• Stronger Tier I instruction
• Consistent curriculum and instructional expectations
• MTSS and targeted intervention
• Assessment practices that provide timely information
• K–12 vertical alignment
• Professional learning and coaching
• Attendance and engagement strategies
• School improvement plans with measurable goals
• Regular monitoring of student data

Each school will continue to establish building-level goals aligned with the district's Strategic Plan.

The district will also continue developing a Strategic Plan dashboard so that progress can be monitored over time and communicated more clearly to the Board, staff, families, and community.

Parchment is intentionally expanding pathways for all students.

Current and developing opportunities include:

• Career and Technical Education partnerships
• Kalamazoo Area Career Center opportunities
• Career Champions programming
• Work-based learning
• Internships and community partnerships
• Career exploration
• Postsecondary planning
• Development of individualized pathways based on students' goals after graduation The Work-Based Learning program at the high school is continuing to grow, and 7th- and 8th-grade students will have opportunities to participate in some of the internship partnerships being developed.

The goal is not a single definition of "college and career readiness." The goal is for every student to graduate with a clear next step and the skills necessary to pursue it.

Improving communication and information sharing is specifically identified in the Strategic Plan.

This fall, the district implemented two new platforms (PowerSchool student information system, and SchoolStatus communication platform) designed to improve communication and information sharing with families.

The district is also working toward more consistent communication about:

• Curriculum and instruction
• Student learning
• School improvement goals
• Student opportunities
• Important dates and events
• District initiatives
• Student achievement data

Our goal is for families to feel informed and connected rather than having to search for information.

Transportation routes are established annually based on the number of students requesting transportation and the geographic distribution of students.

Parchment currently operates a two-tier transportation system:

• One route serves grades 6–12 in the morning.
• A second route serves PreK–5 after the secondary students are delivered.

Under the proposed configuration, the number of students being transported would remain generally similar. Therefore, the district does not currently anticipate a major change in average route times solely because of the proposed grade-level configuration.

Actual routes and times would be determined each year based on transportation requests and student addresses.

No.

The proposed 7th–8th grade space would be designed as a separate middle school wing with an age-appropriate environment.

Students would continue to have:

• Middle school teachers
• Middle school programming
• Middle school activities
• Middle school athletics
• Dedicated middle school spaces
• Developmentally appropriate supports
• A separate middle school identity and experience

The proximity to the high school would also create opportunities for shared facilities and programming, when appropriate for individual students or programs.

The intention is not to eliminate the middle school experience. It is to provide that experience in a different facility configuration.

The proposed configuration would provide access to facilities that are difficult and expensive to duplicate in a separate middle school building.

Potential shared opportunities include:

• Larger gymnasium space
• Additional multipurpose space
• Strength and conditioning facilities
• Science and specialized instructional spaces
• Athletic facilities
• Shared staff expertise
• Career and technical opportunities
• Opportunities for collaboration between middle and high school staff

The precise shared-use schedule would be developed during the planning process.

Middle school athletics would continue.

The proposal includes additional multipurpose and competition space intended to increase the availability of after-school practice space.

The proximity of the middle and high school programs may also create additional opportunities for collaboration between coaches, directors, and students.

Band and other extracurricular programming would continue, with final space assignments determined through the design process.

The district will determine the final administrative structure as part of the planning and staffing process.

The same students will still need developmentally appropriate administrative, counseling, office, and support services.

At the same time, locating the middle and high school programs on one campus creates opportunities for shared services and more efficient use of staff and facilities.

The goal is not simply to duplicate every position or service in two separate buildings if a shared structure can serve students effectively.

Shared spaces can work, particularly in smaller schools.

However, the current configuration creates scheduling challenges as enrollment and programming increase.

When the gym is also used as a cafeteria:

• PE scheduling is constrained by lunch periods.
• Large-group events can displace PE.
• PE sometimes has to move into hallways or classrooms.
• Weather can limit the ability to relocate activities outdoors.
• Other student activities compete for the same space.

A separate gymnasium and cafeteria would allow:

• PE to occur throughout the school day without being tied to the lunch schedule
• The cafeteria to function as a multipurpose gathering space
• Large-group programming without displacing PE
• More consistent access to instructional spaces

The intent is not simply to provide more square footage. It is to provide spaces that can be used simultaneously for different educational purposes.

Districts generally refer to this as Fund Balance or Fund Equity.

A fund balance provides financial stability and helps districts manage unexpected costs and timing differences in state funding.

The district's goal is to maintain an adequate fund balance to protect operations and avoid unnecessary short-term borrowing. Parchment has historically needed to manage the timing gap between expenditures and state funding during the summer and early fall.

The district estimates that summer borrowing costs approximately $60,000 annually.

Importantly, a healthy fund balance is not intended to be used as a substitute for long-term capital funding. Using operating dollars or reserves for major building projects would reduce the resources available for classroom instruction, staffing, student support, and other ongoing educational needs.

The district's operating budget is primarily designed to fund the day-to-day work of educating students. Major capital projects are different.

Roof replacements, major HVAC systems, electrical infrastructure, building additions, security systems, and significant renovations can cost millions of dollars and have useful lives extending for decades.

Michigan's school bond system provides a mechanism for districts to finance those long-term capital investments over time rather than attempting to pay for them entirely from annual operating revenues. State-qualified bonds are subject to review by the Michigan Treasury, including examination of project costs, enrollment projections, debt service, and facility needs.

Bond proceeds also cannot simply be redirected to classroom salaries or other operating expenses.

That distinction is important:

The bond is a capital investment, not a replacement for the district's operating budget.

The Central Elementary scope is intended to address critical repairs and safety-related improvements rather than provide a full building renovation.

Specifically:

• $291,801 is reserved in the application for fire alarm system replacement
• $15,000 is reserved for furnishings or instructional technology

The district is continuing to refine the demolition and site-use assumptions associated with the Middle School. At this time, the estimated cost for decommissioning and demolition is approximately $300,000- less than what we spent on HVAC repairs in the last year alone. The important financial question is not simply the cost of demolition. The district must evaluate the full lifecycle cost of:

• Continuing to operate the Middle School
• Major repairs and renovations
• Utilities
• Maintenance
• Staffing and operational requirements associated with a separate facility
• Potential demolition
• Site disposition or future use
• Construction of the proposed replacement space

The district will provide more specific figures as the project progresses and estimates are finalized.

The November 3, 2026 ballot proposal authorizes Parchment School District to borrow up to $41 million through general obligation unlimited tax bonds. The ballot language identifies the purposes as constructing additions, remodeling and equipping school buildings and facilities, acquiring instructional technology, and preparing and improving sites.

The $41 million is a not-to-exceed authorization. It is not a statement that $41 million in cash would immediately be spent.

The current ballot information identifies an estimated first-year levy of 3.95 mills in 2027, or $3.95 per $1,000 of taxable value, under current law. The estimated simple average annual millage required to retire the bonds is 5.51 mills. The bonds may be outstanding for up to 30 years. These estimates can change based on factors including taxable value, interest rates, and the timing of bond sales.

Because tax impact is a significant decision for households, residents should review the official ballot language and district financial materials for the most current estimates.

No.

Bond proceeds are intended for capital expenditures. Michigan Treasury specifically states that bond proceeds cannot be used for maintenance and repair costs, employee salaries, or ordinary operating expenses.

That means approving a bond does not provide the district with an additional pool of money that can be used to increase teacher salaries or pay for ordinary classroom operations.

The operating budget and the capital budget serve different purposes.

The general fund pays for the ongoing operation of the school district, including:

• Teachers and staff
• Student services
• Curriculum
• Transportation
• Utilities
• Supplies
• Technology
• Special education
• Daily building operations

Major capital projects can cost millions of dollars and are generally financed separately because they provide benefits over many years. Using large amounts of general fund revenue for capital construction would reduce the amount available for ongoing educational services.

Michigan's School Bond Qualification and Loan Program provides state credit enhancement for qualified school bonds.

For qualified bonds, the district receives access to the state's credit rating, which generally can result in lower borrowing costs. State qualification also involves review of project costs, enrollment projections, debt service, and facility needs.

The state qualification process does not eliminate the local taxpayer responsibility for the bond.

The district is examining the number and configuration of buildings it operates, but this is different from combining school districts (which the district is NOT currently considering).

The current proposal contemplates consolidating facilities within Parchment School District, while continuing to operate as one school district.

Factors commonly considered when evaluating school building consolidation include:

• Enrollment and projected enrollment
• Building condition
• Cost of operating and maintaining facilities
• Available classroom capacity
• Programmatic opportunities
• Specialized spaces
• Transportation
• Staffing and certifications
• Student support services
• Financial sustainability
• Opportunities to use buildings more efficiently

Operating fewer buildings can potentially reduce duplicated facility costs and allow resources to be concentrated in the buildings that remain in use.

This is one of the central questions behind the current proposal.

The district has identified significant needs across its existing facilities. Some buildings require substantial investment simply to continue operating them in their current form.

The question is not only:

"How much will it cost to repair our buildings?"

It is also:

"How much will it cost to continue operating and maintaining this number of buildings over the next 10, 20, and 30 years?"

The current proposal attempts to address both sides of that equation by:

• Addressing critical infrastructure needs
• Reducing the number of facilities operated by the district
• Concentrating students and programming into more appropriately sized buildings
• Creating new instructional space where it is needed
• Repurposing existing district assets
• Reducing the long-term maintenance burden associated with some aging facilities The goal is to make facility decisions based not only on today's repair list, but on the long-term use and sustainability of the district's buildings.

The proposed configuration would create more clearly defined grade-level centers:

• Northwood: Kindergarten–2nd Grade
• North: 3rd–6th Grade
• Central: Early childhood programming and district administration

The proposed configuration is intended to better align building capacity with enrollment and create more intentional learning environments for different age groups.

The final details of room assignments, programming, and building design would be determined during the planning and design process.

The proposal is based on projected enrollment, facility condition, operational efficiency, and educational programming.

A grade-level configuration can allow the district to concentrate resources and expertise around the developmental needs of students within a narrower grade span.

It also provides an opportunity to better match building capacity to the number of students expected at each grade level.

Current enrollment ranges from approximately 100 to 135 students per grade level. For planning purposes, the district is using approximately 125 students per grade level, or approximately five sections per grade.

Under that planning assumption:

• A K–2 building would serve approximately 300–375 students.
• A 3–6 building would serve approximately 400–500 students.

These are planning projections, not guarantees of future enrollment.

Traffic flow and student safety are important considerations in the planning process.

The district is reviewing the existing traffic-flow design, current parent transportation patterns, and neighborhood traffic conditions. Because the final site design has not yet been completed, it would be premature to promise a specific traffic pattern today.

Traffic flow, drop-off and pick-up, pedestrian safety, bus circulation, and emergency access would all be considered as part of the detailed design process.

The district is also continuing to communicate with the governmental agencies responsible for roads, signage, and traffic control around our schools.

The Middle School is one of the district's most significant facility challenges.

Multiple facilities assessments have identified substantial needs at the building, and the Middle School has among the highest levels of critical facility needs in the district.

The district therefore evaluated two broad options:

1. Continue investing substantially in the existing Middle School building; or

2. Create new middle school space as part of the existing High School campus.

The current proposal follows the second approach.

Rather than investing heavily in maintaining a separate aging middle school facility, or building a costly new standalone facility, the proposal would create a dedicated 7th–8th grade wing at the high school campus. (The new wings is expected to cost $14,615,611, while a new building is estimated to cost $55,000,000.)

This allows the district to address facility needs while reducing the number of separate buildings it must operate.

Yes.

Examples in the region include districts with varying grade configurations, including Schoolcraft, Lawrence, Allegan, Galesburg, and Decatur.

Schoolcraft Community Schools is a particularly relevant local example. Its configuration includes a 7–12 secondary campus and an elementary campus.

Parchment representatives have toured Schoolcraft's facilities and spoken with district staff about their experience.

These examples do not mean that another district's experience will automatically be Parchment's experience. They provide opportunities to study different configurations and identify practices that may be applicable to Parchment.

The district's facilities work identified several immediate and long-term needs.

HVAC

The district spent more than $300,000 on HVAC repairs in the previous year alone.

Needs identified include:

• Unit ventilators
• Boilers
• Controls
• Filtration systems
• Heating and cooling equipment

Roofing

Portions of every building require attention, and several existing roof warranties have expired or are approaching expiration.

Roof failures can result in damage to other building systems and can become significantly more expensive when repairs are delayed.

Safety and Security

Needs include:

• Alarm systems
• Public-address systems
• Secure vestibules
• Building access controls
• Other safety-related infrastructure

Electrical and Building Systems

The district also has aging electrical and mechanical systems that require significant capital investment. These systems are not visible in the same way as a new classroom or playground, but they are fundamental to keeping a school building operational.

The decision about Central was based on multiple facilities studies, enrollment projections, program needs, and cost comparisons.

The district evaluated whether existing spaces could accommodate administration and early childhood programming without maintaining an elementary building for those purposes. The analysis found that incorporating administration and the Early Learning Center into other existing spaces would not provide adequate capacity, particularly given anticipated growth in early childhood programming.

Expanding existing buildings to accommodate those programs would have required approximately 6–8 additional classrooms and increased the overall project cost by approximately $10 million.

The proposed use of Central allows the district to continue using an existing district asset while avoiding that additional expansion. Placing the program in the "newest" wing of Central, allows us to operate with fewer improvements than would be required if an entire elementary program were to be housed there.

The district considered both Northwood and Central as potential locations for the K–2 configuration.

Three major factors influenced the decision:

1. Cost

The estimated cost to update Central to house all K–2 students was significantly higher than the cost to update Northwood.

2. Facility Condition

The facility condition assessment identified a higher Fix-to-Cost Index at Central than at Northwood:

• Central: approximately 67%
• Northwood: approximately 42%

The higher index at Central indicates a greater long-term investment need.

3. Building Envelope and Energy Efficiency

Central has older portions of the building with greater energy-efficiency challenges involving the building envelope, including doors, windows, and roofing.

The newest portion of Central is substantially more appropriate for the proposed early childhood use because it requires fewer updates.

The proposed configuration therefore attempts to match each building with the use for which it can operate most efficiently.

That option was considered.

The analysis found that Central would require significantly greater investment to become the K–2 facility, while Northwood provides a more efficient option for the K–2 population.

Conversely, early childhood programming can be concentrated primarily in the newer portion of Central, reducing the amount of renovation required.

The final recommendation was therefore based on the relative condition, cost, capacity, and intended use of each building.

The band field would be relocated as part of the site planning.

The final location and design would be determined through the detailed planning process.

A turf field has been mentioned by students, but it was not identified as a priority by the Bond Steering Committee and is not a component of the current proposal.

A track replacement was discussed during earlier bond planning.

The district's current track is in poor condition and will eventually require significant attention if the district is to continue hosting home meets.

However, the Steering Committee did not identify track replacement as a priority within the current bond scope given the number and cost of other critical infrastructure needs.

Yes. The facility needs identified at the Middle School would remain regardless of the outcome of the bond. The difference would be how the district addresses them. One option is to continue operating the existing facility and determine how to fund necessary repairs and improvements; this would likely be included in the scope of a revised bond proposal. The current bond proposal provides a different pathway: construct new 7th–8th grade space at the high school campus and reduce the number of separate buildings operated by the district.

The district would continue to operate its existing schools and would still need to address facility needs. The district would also continue evaluating its facility footprint in light of:

• Enrollment trends
• Building condition
• Maintenance costs
• Operational costs
• Capital needs
• Available resources

Without the bond, the district would not have the same capital resources to implement the proposed facility restructuring.

This would require the Board and administration to evaluate which projects could be addressed through existing resources, future funding opportunities, additional elections, or other facility strategies.

If the proposal is approved, the district would move into detailed planning, design, and implementation.

That process would include continued work with architects, engineers, construction professionals, staff, community stakeholders, and the Board of Education.

The district's responsibility throughout that process would be to:

• Protect student safety
• Maintain fiscal responsibility
• Follow the approved bond scope
• Communicate decisions clearly
• Seek stakeholder input
• Monitor construction and expenditures
• Maintain educational continuity
• Plan for long-term maintenance
• Ensure that facilities support the district's Strategic Plan

The goal of the planning process would be to turn the broad framework approved by voters into detailed facilities that serve students, staff, families, and the community for many years.

We welcome additional questions and continued conversation.

Community members may contact the Parchment School District office at 269-488-1050 or review the district's official bond information and supporting materials.

Questions are an important part of this process. Our goal is to provide the community with clear information about the district's needs, the proposed plan, the financial implications, and the decisions that remain to be made.