Our demands for the PPS Board

1. Vote NO on the “Future-Ready Plan”

2. Face the facts

3. Take action

4. Build the future together

Talking points

Demand 1: Vote NO on the “Future-Ready Plan”

We demand the PPS Board vote NO on the Future-Ready Plan, which has not changed or improved since it was voted down in November 2025. 

Demand 2: Face the facts

Six harmful myths have made this process difficult.

It’s time to face the facts.

❌ MYTH 1:
Superintendent Walters has given the Board important details they need to vote on permanent school closures and the Future-Ready Plan. 

✅ FACT:
Superintendent Walters has avoided providing complete, accurate data, even when it was required by the Board.

• Dr. Walters didn’t meet the requirements for the Implementation Plan deliverables authorized by the Board on Aug. 27, 2025.

• In both the Feb. 17 and the Nov. 17, 2025 Board meetings, several Board Directors asked questions about missing or convoluted data, and Dr. Walters evaded questions and insisted he provided the information.

• When a parent submitted a Right To Know request for basic information about the data and assumptions underlying the Future-Ready plan, the Walters administration had to admit the data doesn’t exist. 

• No public data exists as evidence that the Walters administration has updated the flawed facility utilization data used to decide which schools to close.

❌ MYTH 2:
The Walters administration has sufficiently engaged the community that will be directly impacted by permanent school building closures.

✅ FACT:
PPS held public hearings last summer to check a legal box.

• PA law requires a public hearing before a school district permanently closes a building.

• PPS scheduled these hearings in July, when families are working, traveling, juggling childcare, and not checking district calendars.

• PPS held the hearings in Oakland, not in the neighborhood where a building would be closed.

• The result: Overall, only 91 people testified for the 9 buildings slated to be shuttered, and the hearings lasted for a total of 3 hours and 37 minutes. For the 5 majority Black schools, which serve over 900 students and their families, PPS only heard from 40 people for 1 hour and 57 minutes of testimony. (Number of speakers: Miller 1, Manchester 5, SAC 7, Morrow 7, Fulton 20.)

• Three new Board Directors (Erikka Grayson, Eva Diodoti, and Tawana Cook Purnell) were not on the Board until after these meetings occurred.

• New families, who enrolled in the 9 schools this year, have not had an opportunity to provide input.

❌ MYTH 3:
It is not the Board’s place to tell the Superintendent how to do the job they hired him for.

✅ FACT:
It is each Board Director’s right and responsibility to speak up, represent the people of Pittsburgh, and hold the Superintendent accountable. 

• The Board’s Feb. 17 meeting to discuss the Future-Ready Plan was facilitated by a consultant from CGCS, who misinformed the Board about their rights.

• It is within the Board's purview to say that the Superintendent has not faithfully administered this process, and to require changes.

• For example, if the Board wants to require a dedicated additional position to oversee implementation before they approve a reconfiguration plan, that is their right. 

❌ MYTH 4:
Focusing on filling up buildings with students is the only way to fix/save/improve equity in the district.

✅ FACT:
Focusing on filling up buildings will displace the very students PPS has failed the most. That’s not equity.

• Previous building closures didn’t save money, stabilize enrollment, or improve student outcomes.

• A large body of research has shown that closing public schools harms children and families,[1] compounding trauma and setbacks for communities who face structural racism.[2]

• Packing more students in each school will result in larger class sizes, and less individual support and attention from teachers and counselors, who will be stretched too thin.

• Even if we do focus on building usage, there are viable alternatives to closure, like adapting spaces for community services.

• The biggest differences between student outcomes are not connected to programs and resources, not building capacity. Let’s focus on how we can more equitably distribute programs and resources.

❌ MYTH 5:
The Board has an all-or-nothing choice: vote for this plan, or the status quo.

✅ FACT:
That is a false choice. 

• Vote NO on this plan that would harm students.

• AND take action on changes that will actually benefit students.

❌ MYTH 6:
Reconsideration of the same plan defeated in November will result in meaningful changes.

✅ FACT:
For meaningful changes, the Board needs to vote NO on this already-rejected plan, and turn their focus to changes they can implement now.

• The “reconsideration” process is biased toward the people who support the deeply flawed, already rejected plan.

• Two Board Directors who supported the plan in November are leading this “reconsideration” as Board President and Education Committee Chair. They should not be in charge of the process to reconsider the same Plan. Gene Walker manipulated the process and voted No, while admitting that he is in full support of the plan.Tracey Reed voted Yes. 

• Board Directors who voted No on this plan (Devon Taliaferro, Emma Yourd, and Yael Silk) and three newly elected Board Directors (Erikka Grayson, Eva Diodoti, and Tawana Cook Purnell) have no say about the format of the next Education Committee meetings where they will discuss  reconsideration of the plan.

Demand 3: Take action

Board Directors, you may have heard some people advocate for preserving their specific school or program. But for two years, most community voices have demanded thoughtful, equitable change.

Real equity-centered change is within reach.There are changes you could enact NOW, to phase in changes without displacing and harming over 6,000 students. 

For example, there is Board consensus on the idea to move Gifted instruction from the Gifted Center (which requires expensive and inefficient midday buses) to home schools.

This is a great place to start because it:

• takes a critical look at a delivery model that has disproportionately underserved Black students

• changes the delivery model so that it expands access to all students, by redirecting resources and increasing staff capacity in home schools

• is currently showing success in two PPS schools, so the administration can assess what works and what could be improved for future transitions

Demand 4: Build the future together

We need to plan for the future. Any plan for change must begin with community wisdom, consider alternatives to closures, and actually address the current inequitable distribution of resources and programs.

Vote NO. Face the facts. Take action. Build the future of PPS together.