A committee of the Cumberland County Board of Education wants the school board to reverse four major facility decisions it made in February, including ending the year-round calendar at E.E. Miller Elementary School.
The four-member Auxiliary Services Committee unanimously voted Tuesday to recommend that the full school board reverse decisions ending the year-round calendar at E.E. Miller, demolishing the former Pauline Jones Elementary School, and consolidating Ramsey Street High School and Alger B. Wilkins High School into other campuses.
The school board approved the moves on February 9. The Pauline Jones vote was unanimous; the other three votes were 5-4.
All four of the committee’s rescission motions passed unanimously and now move to the full board for consideration.
Backlash Prompts E.E. Miller Year-Round Reversal
The committee voted Tuesday to recommend reversing the full board’s February 9 approval that transitioned E.E. Miller Elementary School from a year-round calendar to a traditional calendar before the 2027–28 school year.
The February vote prompted significant pushback from parents, who argued that eliminating the year-round model would disrupt childcare arrangements and remove an option many families intentionally selected.
Under Tuesday’s recommendation, E.E. Miller would remain on a year-round calendar—at least for now—though questions remain about what happens to students after fifth grade.
Board Chair Judy Musgrave said she supported reversing the earlier vote but questioned whether the district has a long-term plan for families seeking year-round education beyond elementary school. On February 9, Musgrave was one of four board members who voted against ending year-round school at E.E. Miller, though the measure passed 5-4.
“I think rescinding E.E. Miller is wonderful,” Musgrave said. “But where will the students transition to if Anne Chestnutt is not available to them? Where will the children go if they want to transition to year-round?”
Currently, Cumberland County Schools does not have a designated feeder pathway that guarantees E.E. Miller students continue in a year-round model when they move to middle school. A feeder pathway is the structured progression in which students from one school are automatically assigned to a specific middle or high school.
Kevin Coleman, associate superintendent of auxiliary services, said that pathway does not exist for year-round students beyond fifth grade.
“There is no feeder pattern at this point going forward with Anne Chestnutt,” Coleman said. “At this point, as it stands, E.E. Miller would be where year-round ends.”
That means families who want to continue in a year-round calendar after fifth grade need to pursue transfer requests or other enrollment options rather.
Board member Greg West described the reversal as a practical compromise that addresses parent concerns while giving the district time to examine its broader calendar structure. West voted February 9 to approve ending the year-round model at E.E. Miller.
“The approval now is the rescission to appease the E.E. Miller folks with a K-5 solution for year-round,” West said. “In the big scheme of things, that’s not a lot of money in the context of our entire budget.”
West said the additional cost of maintaining a standalone year-round program at E.E. Miller is estimated to be between $50,000 and $100,000 annually—an amount he characterized as relatively modest compared with the district’s overall budget of nearly $637 million. He urged the board to take a measured approach moving forward.
“You can’t do all this at one time,” West said. “It’s just not feasible.”
Pauline Jones Demolition Reversed
The committee also voted to recommend reversing the full board’s February 9 approval to demolish the former Pauline Jones Elementary School buildings and initiate the transfer of the parcel to Cumberland County for $1.
Nick Sojka, the school board’s attorney, referenced Pauline Jones while explaining how the surplus process works under North Carolina law.
“For example, like Pauline Jones—there hasn’t been a Pauline Jones elementary school for some time,” Sojka said. “But the board back then obviously made a decision that we’re not going to do anything, we want to keep it for education purposes.”
He noted that the district had previously partnered with Fayetteville Technical Community College to use the facility, illustrating how a property can remain in educational use even after a traditional school closes.
Under North Carolina law, once a property is formally declared surplus, it must first be offered to the county commission before it can be sold publicly.
Ramsey Street, Alger B. Wilkins Moves Reversed
The committee also voted to recommend reversing two actions involving Ramsey Street High School and Alger B. Wilkins High School.
On February 9, the board approved reassigning and renaming Ramsey Street High School to the Douglas Byrd Middle North Building before the start of the 2026–27 school year. The board also approved relocating Alger B. Wilkins High School to available space within Douglas Byrd High School.
Both actions were part of a broader facilities restructuring plan that included vacating existing campuses and initiating the process required by state law before property can be declared surplus and offered to the county.
During his committee presentation on Tuesday, Sojka emphasized that relocation and school closure are not the same under state law.
“This is about school closure and consolidation,” Sojka said. “This is about closing a school for all time—this is not talking about relocation of a school or a program.”
Sojka specifically referenced Alger B. Wilkins as an example.
“When we had the discussion earlier about relocation of Alger B. Wilkins from its current site to Douglas Byrd North, that’s a relocation,” he said. “Alger B. Wilkins will continue—it’s just going to be in a different place.”
The vote by the committee on Tuesday effectively pauses those relocation directives ahead of further board review.
The earlier approvals had contributed to public confusion about whether Ramsey Street and Alger B. Wilkins were being permanently closed or simply relocated as part of a consolidation strategy.
‘There Is No Final Decision’
Sojka delivered a detailed presentation clarifying North Carolina’s statutory school closure requirements, emphasizing that the February 9 votes initiated a legal process but did not finalize any school closures.
“In light of all of the actions taken by the board recently with regard to facilities, there are so many moving parts and so many legal requirements, it is easy to get lost in the weeds,” Sojka said. “We want to try to bring clarity to this subject.”
Sojka explained that under state law, the board must follow a multi-step process before closing a school. That process begins with a formal board vote to activate the closure procedure—which occurred February 9 for several campuses—but that vote does not predetermine the outcome.
From there, the district must conduct a “thorough study” of each school under consideration, focusing primarily on student welfare. The study must examine geographic factors, enrollment trends, potential hardship to students, facility costs, and any other factors the board considers relevant.
Once completed, the study must be posted publicly and made available for review for a reasonable period of time. Then the board must hold a public hearing to allow citizens to express their views.
Only after the hearing can the board take a final vote on whether to close the school.
“We’re at the beginning of the process,” Sojka said. “There is no final decision.”
Board Members Raise Communication Concerns
Board member Terra Jordan said earlier messaging may have confused families. Jordan, who serves on the Auxiliary Services Committee, was among the board members who voted against several of the February 9 facility actions.
“When I saw ‘final,’ that means there’s nothing else we need to do,” Jordan said. “So if I was a parent and I see ‘final,’ I think there’s nothing else I can do.”
Lindsay Whitley, associate superintendent of communications and community engagement, defended the district’s communications, saying they accurately reflected board motions.
“I just wanted to reemphasize that’s what we have communicated,” Whitley said. “We’ve used the board’s motion discussion, and we’ve used the terminology activating the statutory process as shared.”
“There were some things at that meeting that were final in that the board had made a decision that did not require public input,” he continued. “So I do think that that’s where maybe some of the confusion. But the information on the site was accurate, has been accurate and is accurate, and we followed up with FAQs to try to explain it.”
