The East Penn School Board reviewed a $142 million redistricting option that would involve additions or renovations at four schools as well as changes to school boundaries.
The redistricting proposal presented at Monday’s board meeting is just one option to address the district’s capacity challenges, and a K-8 realignment option paused in the summer is still under consideration as an alternative, Superintendent Kristen Campbell said.
“I also want to emphasize that when we start talking about proposals to change school boundaries that information can be very impactful, so I think the word ‘proposed’ changes is very important,” Campbell said. “At this point we are looking at an option, and we’re making considerations.”
Under the redistricting proposal, East Penn’s seven elementary schools would remain as K-5 buildings and the two middle schools would continue to host grade 6-8 students.
Additions would be constructed at Alburtis and Lincoln elementary schools as well as Lower Macungie Middle School, and Eyer Middle School would be renovated.
These buildings are the same four buildings considered when redistricting was originally discussed in 2023, Campbell said.
Earlier plans would have made Eyer Middle School a fifth- and sixth-grade school, and designate Lower Macungie Middle School for seventh and eighth grades. The projects would cost an estimated $95 million, and construction was set to begin in summer 2026. The district also was considering $250 million in renovations to Emmaus High School.
Those plans were paused after concern over the cost and transparency over the process. District officials said Monday that discussions between now and the spring will look again at K-8 realignment and high school options as financial models are updated.
Construction plans presented Monday by Breslin Architects show work at Alburtis and Lincoln elementary schools starting in spring 2026 and running through 2029, while work at Lower Macungie and Eyer middle schools would begin in 2028 and end in 2032.
Proposed changes to elementary school boundaries are designed to provide capacity relief at all seven buildings and open classroom space for an “innovate” course that would become a fifth special for East Penn elementary students. A special is the elementary version of an elective — like art, music or physical education.
Beyond the creation of that “innovate” course, the redistricting proposal would keep the district’s academic programs “relatively consistent” to current offerings, Campbell said.
Proposed new boundaries
A total of 347 elementary school students would move sites under the redistricting plan.
Willow Lane students who live at the 5037 Wild Cherry Lane development would move to Macungie. Wescosville students who live at Spring Creek Estates 2022 would move to Shoemaker, as would Alburtis students who live at Woodmont Valley Apartments.
Boundary adjustments would affect 264 Eyer students and 328 Lower Macungie students.
Lower Macungie Middle School has a higher student capacity than Eyer Middle School, and maintaining its larger population would lower the need to hire additional staff and allow students to remain within their team-based instructional model, Campbell said.
Students who live at the following developments would move from Eyer to Lower Macungie: Spring Creek Estates 2022, Woodmont Valley Apartments, Hills of Lockridge West Phase 2 and Mertztown.
Students who live at 5037 Wild Cherry Lane and East Texas Village would move from Lower Macungie to Eyer.
Concerns on cost, timelines
Board member Joshua Levinson noted that the redistricting option is significantly more expensive than estimates given for the K-8 realignment option.
“I’d be hard pressed to think that in just a year, we’re going to bridge a $45 million gap and then put these on parity,” Levinson said.
The redistricting proposal would spread construction over an extended timeline compared with the realignment option, which could further raise costs, Levinson said.
Redistricting would also mean fewer programmatic changes, Levinson said, adding, “At least from where I’m sitting, I find that to be less impactful and then maybe less robust — a less robust means in order to facilitate positive changes and impacts on our students over the next couple of decades.”
Levinson said he’s keeping an open mind as conversations continue regarding the financial modeling of the options at play.
“Are we going to adopt a plan that is more akin to Band-Aids or half measures or something that’s actually going to try and really fix things and set us up for the next 20 or 30 years?” Levinson asked.
Board President Shonta Ford urged her fellow board members to trust the information the experts are presenting while remaining sensitive to time parameters and constraints.
“I’m very sensitive to the fact that the clock is ticking,” Ford said. “When I hear talking about work in 2029 and ‘32, I get very concerned because the need isn’t going to go away. The buildings aren’t going to renew themselves. Depreciation is a real thing.”
