Tuesday, May 12, 2026

Guest Opinion | Dr. Elizabeth Pomeroy: A Vision for PUSD

As I  consider the reconfiguring and possible closing of  PUSD schools, some concerns come to mind.  If education is learning to ask the right questions, let’s take that approach to these tough decisions.

I am writing from the experience of 13 years on the PUSD Board of Education, during which time we voted to close 6 elementary schools and one middle school.  Not long before I joined the Board, 4 other elementary schools were closed.  These closings are part of the District’s history and must be considered in future planning.  So, to the questions:

What became of the vacant campuses after students were gone?   Of the 10 elementaries, 4 became charter schools, one was leased to a private school, 3 had combined charter and PUSD uses, one was leased to the City of Pasadena, and one is being planned for PUSD staff housing.  The middle school combines charter and PUSD uses.

Does closing campuses save PUSD money?  The District’s consultants in this matter estimate that closing a campus saves about $500,000 per year.  But consider the offsets: when a school closes, some of those students do not return to PUSD.  This amounts to lost revenue as District funding is based on enrollment and attendance.  When charter schools come in, more lost revenue, as some PUSD students choose to go there.  Costs for a closed campus do not vanish, as the District must maintain its property.

But what about those anticipated savings?   The consultants suggest an average figure saved per campus.  This might work for a District that has only (or mainly) public schools, when displaced students just move to another District campus.  PUSD surroundings are not like that.  Here we have an abundance of charter schools, private schools, faith-based schools.  Students displaced by PUSD school closings may disperse to many other choices.

Does closing schools really lead to better resources for the campuses that are left ?  I’m not sure there is any clear data about better library coverage, or increased art programs, or nurses not spread so thin, etc. as we hoped for in closing campuses during my Board time.  Yes, some signature programs can be transplanted, as the Mandarin Immersion Program successfully went from Burbank to Field.  But a well-rooted thriving learning community – like a high school Academy or long-successful arts program –can be shattered when its bonds are broken and its people scattered.  Why do that?  Does such a loss not diminish PUSD ?

Does PUSD need 4 high schools?    If a district the size of PUSD were being planned from scratch, one proposal might be:  let’s have two large high schools.  But PUSD is not starting from scratch.  We have 4 high schools now, each a thriving community with distinctive character.   Each is chosen by families for its size, or offerings, or traditions.  Each has academic achievements:  National Merit Scholars, high graduation rate, many AP offerings, career academies with deep roots of collaborations and internships in Pasadena.  Many families choose the 6-12 schools, as they ease the transition between middle and high school.   I don’t believe we should part with any of them.  Much would be lost.

So what should be done instead, for fiscal health ?    I would like to see the District fiercely protect its learning communities: the schools.   The County Office of Education (LACOE) is cautiously approving the District’s current path forward.   Instead of sacrificing campuses, let’s look to District properties that don’t directly serve students:  the Ed Center administration building, former Rose City campus buildings, what about the District Service Center and warehouse on Woodbury Avenue ?    An Asset Management Committee is, I believe, now looking at repurposing those properties to yield revenue.   This will take an overall vision.  Let’s prioritize downsizing the warehouses and not our students’  academic homes.

Is this a good time to consider closing more campuses ?  I think not.  Current students have already been through a COVID year, and now the devastating fire.   We need to build on what we have, not diminish and destabilize  PUSD strengths.

What is all this discussion doing to our PUSD?   Community engagement is a good thing, and people who care greatly about public education are speaking out.   But creating rivalries, even hostilities, is not helpful.   Instead, let us ask the question:  how can we preserve the things that make families choose PUSD ?  The answer to that will be our vision.

Dr. Elizabeth Pomeroy is a longtime local educator, writer, and civic leader who served on the Pasadena Unified School District (PUSD) Board of Education for 13 years, including multiple terms as board president.