Key Takeaways: Four community members each spoke in opposition to an open enrollment or lottery-based transfer policy, citing concerns about fairness, resource strain, safety, and long-term financial and community impacts. They each urged the board to prioritize resident families, maintain the district’s closed boundaries, and improve transparency and public input before making any policy changes. The board approved a request to replace the chiller in the Happy Hollow building and approved the 2026 budget. The board voted 4–2 to reject a proposal to encourage public deliberation by limiting the use of email discussions to procedural, informational, or emergency matters. The board unanimously approved a revision to Policy B225 requiring the district to send email notification of upcoming board meetings with the agenda to anyone who would like to receive this information.
Agenda with links to board documents
Topic Timestamps: YouTube Recording
- 0:05 WLIS presentation
- 11:42 Transportation presentation
- 22:38 Public comments on transfers
- 35:39 Approval of consent agenda (minutes, personal report, accounts payable, field trip)
- 36:23 Happy Hollow update and approval to replace the chiller
- 41:00 2026 Budget Adoption
- 52:31 Policy B150 – Organizational Meeting, Board of Finances and Committees postponed
- 1:04:18 Policy B175 – Functions approved
- 1:05:24 Policy B200 – Membership passed with 4-2 vote
- 1:37:33 Policy B225 – Board Meetings with revision to provide notifications approved
- 1:50:38 Policy B250 – School Board Member Ethics passed with 4-2 vote
- 2:03:06 Policy C100 – Entrance Age and Requirements approved
- 2:05:34 Policy C150 – Homeless Students-Enrollment Rights and Services approved
- 2:09:13 Policy C200 – Anti-Bullying postponed
- 2:10:13 1st Reading of Policies: C175 Student Attendance, Academic Engagement and Truancy Prevention with legal updates and suggested updates, C225 Parental Access to Instructional Material and Surveys, C250 Title I Parent and Family Engagement, C275 Test Security Provisions for Statewide Assessments, C300 Programs for Students with Disabilities and Least Restrictive Environment, C350 Student Discipline, C400 Use of Restraint and Seclusion with Students, C425 Student Suicide Prevention and Awareness, C450 Drug Prevention and Drug Testing, C500 School Trips and Privately Sponsored Activities Involving School Corporation Employees and Students, C525 Medical Needs at School, C550 Student Search and Seizure, C575 Student Homework, C600 Withdrawal from School
- 2:11:48 Superintendent Report
- 2:16:10 CFO Report
- 2:17:10 Board Reports
The following is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions.
0:05 – The regular meeting began (board member Rachel Witt was unable to attend). Principal Margaret Psarros presented information about West Lafayette Intermediate School (WLIS).
11:42 – Director of Transportation Doug Caldwell presented information about WLCSC Transportation.
22:38 Communication from the Audience (those who had signed up before the meeting began)
● Lily Qiao, parent, spoke in opposition to the proposal to open the district to students from outside through a lottery system. She acknowledged the declining enrollment and reduced state funding but argued that open enrollment would create more problems than it solves. She expressed concern that it would strain classrooms, teachers, and facilities, and emphasized that district resources should be focused on families who live and invest in the community. She warned that weakening the connection between residency and enrollment could lower property values and discourage families from moving to the area, ultimately worsening enrollment decline. Instead, she urged the board to strengthen academic programs, attract new resident families, and improve efficiency to address the root causes. She reminded board members that their responsibility is to those who live in the community.
● Yimei Tang, parent, voiced concerns about an open enrollment policy, emphasizing the need for fairness, safety, and sustainability. She cautioned that a lottery system would be emotionally damaging for children who are not selected and could create complications for families with multiple children. She also raised safety concerns, noting that more transfer students would increase traffic and that the district must determine how many additional students and vehicles can be safely accommodated. She warned of long-term sustainability issues, questioning what would happen if future grade levels reach capacity and suggesting that encouraging transfers could lead to a shrinking local tax base. This would reduce funding for teacher salaries, building maintenance, and student support, potentially harming all students. She urged for a decision that is forward-looking and supports the well-being of every student, family, and staff member in the district.
● Kimberly Lundgren, parent, recently moved into the district and shared her perspective based on experience serving on a public school board in another state and leading an independent school focused on educational access. She emphasized that her family intentionally chose West Lafayette schools after comparing options across the region, but found the housing stock within the district limited. Their realtor and others in the community suggested purchasing a home outside the district and applying for transfer, which they discovered to be a common and publicly accepted practice despite ambiguity in how decisions are made. They ultimately chose to rent within the district while waiting to see how the board would address the transfer policy. She explained that their decision to purchase and invest in a home within district boundaries depends on whether the district maintains closed borders. She argued that continuing to allow transfers discourages families from moving into the district, which undermines property values and long-term financial viability. She urged the board to recognize that closing the district would incentivize homeownership, increase assessed property values, and strengthen the district’s financial foundation.
● Kevin So, resident in the school district, shared that he participated in the transfer policy survey conducted by Yin and emphasized support for current transfer students, noting that his children have formed close friendships with them. He urged the district to support these students through high school completion and clarified that the policy debate should focus on future transfer students. He argued that residents who pay higher local taxes do so with the expectation of supporting their own schools and children, highlighting the issue of fairness. Drawing a parallel to public universities, he explained that out-of-state students pay significantly higher tuition than in-state students because Indiana taxpayers subsidize in-state education. He contended that allowing out-of-district students into West Lafayette schools without a comparable financial contribution is unfair to local taxpayers. He urged the board to hold a more open and formal process for public input before making a final decision on the transfer student policy.
35:39 Consent Agenda:
● Agenda for the October 6, 2025 Regular Meeting
● Minutes of the September 8, 2025 Work Session
● Minutes of the September 8, 2025 Regular Meeting
● Field Trip: German 3-4 Classes
● Accounts Payable WLCSC and Accounts Payable WVEC
Voted 6 out of 6
36:23 Happy Hollow Chiller – Engineering/Architect Agreement: Greiner provided an update on the community input process for the future of the Happy Hollow facility, noting that a recent survey conducted with Adam Jones, consultant from Skybound, received 239 responses from a diverse group of stakeholders. The results showed strong support for maintaining and expanding programming in STEM, robotics, student programing, community education, recreation, and wellness. Over 90% of respondents indicated a willingness to pay for valued programming, reflecting strong community investment in the facility. Based on this feedback and the goal of preserving Happy Hollow as a community asset, Greiner recommended moving forward with the chiller replacement to keep the building safe and functional. He also shared that additional input will be gathered through focus groups facilitated by Jones on October 29 (in-person) and October 31 (virtual).
Cronk added that replacing the chiller is necessary for continued use of the building and that the district will work with Creative Engineering Solutions, a firm familiar with the district’s HVAC systems. She noted that the architect-engineering agreement, developed in collaboration with attorney John Becker, outlines a service cost of $50,400, which aligns with industry standards at 10–12% of projected construction costs. She asked the board to approve the agreement so that design work could proceed and competitive bidding could begin.
Voted 6 out of 6
41:00 Budget Adoption: School Budget, 2026 Referendum Fund Revenue Spending Plan, 2026 Capital Expenditures Plan and Notice, 2026 School Bus Replacement Plan and Notice, Resolution of Budget Reductions: This is the first year that the administration did not ask the board to grant them the authority to make transfers and changes to the budget as they see fit without needing to go back to the board for approval (2024 October 2:43:03 and 2023 October 2:19:40). These prior requests passed, but I had voted against them and argued that the board should not abdicate its authority over the budget. I strongly believe that we make better financial decisions as a school district when administrators are required to present their justification to the board and ask for approval. It is encouraging to see real progress in this district toward greater transparency and less rubber stamping of whatever the administrators request.
Voted 6 out of 6
52:31 Policy B150 – Organizational Meeting, Board of Finances and Committees: Mumford questioned the inclusion of a provision requiring the board to set a fee for individuals requesting meeting notices in paragraph 4, pointing out that no fee for this has ever been charged in the past. Purpura agreed that no fee has been charged in the past and that he does not think that the board anticipates charging a fee in the future but explained that including the language “the board shall set the fee charged to individuals who request notice of board meetings” offers flexibility to charge one in the future. Mumford disagreed.
Mumford also referenced the statement in paragraph 4 that “the board shall appoint individual board members to committees,” noting that current practice is that the board president has been making all appointments unilaterally without board approval. The two policy committee members present, Wang and Purpura, were unsure why this language was included. Wang suggested the policy committee review it. Mumford then made a motion to postpone action on policy B150 to a future meeting to allow time for the policy committee to discuss the issues.
Voted 6 out of 6 to postpone
1:04:18 Policy B175 – Functions
Voted 6 out of 6
1:05:24 Policy B200 – Membership: Wang explained that the policy committee reviewed and seriously considered a proposed amendment (in blue) from a board member and modified it, resulting in the revised green text now being recommended for adoption.
Mumford expressed concern that the green text doesn’t adequately reflect the board president’s responsibility as the official spokesperson. Citing guidance from ISBA, she emphasized that any communication on behalf of the board should have the full board’s consent. Due to past issues where the president spoke on behalf of the board without board members’ knowledge nor approval, Mumford made a motion to adopt the original blue text instead. Wang explained that the policy committee found the recommended revision to require full board review and majority approval before the president can speak publicly to be impractical. In real-world situations, timely communication is often necessary, and waiting for board approval isn’t always feasible. He emphasized the importance of having a designated spokesperson, namely the board president, to represent the board in such cases.
Yin expressed support for adding the blue language to clarify that the board president should only speak publicly on behalf of the board with prior board approval. She shared past instances where she was surprised and uncomfortable with the communications sent out by the board president including district-wide emails, a Q&A section added to the school website, and other announcements, without board discussion or consent. Yin emphasized that the board should act collectively and that all members should be consulted before public representations are made.
The argument that there are situations where the board president cannot consult the board before communicating publicly actually reinforces the point that such responses should come from the superintendent, not the board president. If the president is going to speak on behalf of the board, it must be explicitly authorized by the board. There have been repeated instances in recent years where the board president has used official communications to promote her individual viewpoints on district matters.
Voted 2 out of 6 to approve Mumford’s revisions, including Yin’s addition that all board members should be receptive to feedback (Austin, Lyle, Purpura, and Wang opposed)
Voted 4 out of 6 to approve the revision that the board president will be receptive to feedback (Mumford and Yin opposed)
Voted 3 out of 6 to approve Yin’s revision to sentence in paragraph 3 to say “An individual who is at least 18 years of age and is eligible to assume office as a member of the board is qualified.” (Austin, Lyle, and Purpura opposed) so it did not pass
Voted 4 out of 6 to approve policy B200 with all green revisions (Yin and Mumford opposed)
1:37:33 Policy B225 – Board Meetings: The revision specifies that notifications about upcoming board meetings, including the agenda, will be sent to parents and staff via email or the district’s official communication system. Other community members who wish to receive these notifications may contact the central office to be added to the distribution list. For years I have been asking the school district to send an email before each board meeting with the agenda to anyone who wants to sign up to receive it. I am so grateful that the other board members voted to approve my revisions to this policy to make this happen. I would like the district to include direct links to the relevant board packet documents for each agenda item so that community members can easily access the information without needing to search through the school’s website. This is another meaningful step towards allowing access and will make it harder for future boards to hide information. It’s shocking to think that up until 2022, nothing was shared with the public. The entire school board packet was kept confidential and board meeting agendas were intentionally vague (for example, a motion that was approved to start the reduction in force process to fire all the first-year teachers at WLES and WLIS was listed on the agenda as “enrollment projections”).
Voted 4 out of 6 on Yin’s revision to clarify the language (Austin and Lyle opposed)
Voted 6 out of 6 to approve the revised policy B225
1:50:38 Policy B250 – School Board Member Ethics: Mumford explained that her proposed text in blue was based on a recommendation from the Indiana School Boards Association (ISBA) regarding appropriate board email use. The policy committee had claimed that this could not be included in the policy, but the ISBA legal counsel confirmed that school boards are allowed to define their communication practices in policy. Mumford moved to add the blue text to clarify that email communication among board members should be limited to procedural or informational matters and avoid any discussion or solicitation of opinions on substantive or potentially controversial issues that should be addressed in public meetings.
Yin said she supported the revision to promote transparency and potentially reduce public records costs. Purpura agreed that while the board has the authority to adopt the blue text, but claimed that Indiana law allows public entities to use email for deliberation, and said that there is no legal restriction against the board discussing issues over email. He said, “I don’t think there’s any legal reason to avoid expressing, soliciting opinions, or having discussions via email. I think that adding the blue text restricts us too much in some of the ways that we do need to move certain things through quicker. I do think that we all need to be well behaved through email and other means of communication, and we need to work better as a group and as individuals to be supportive of each other and not to be critical. I think that that’s something that we need to work on, but I don’t think that that’s specifically a policy.”
Lyle motioned to revise the text to prohibit board member use of: “blog posts, Substack posts, and other published media.” No one second his motion. Everyone on the board knows that Lyle’s proposal is not legal. I saw this as just another criticism of my board meeting summaries. Four of my fellow board members (Lyle, Purpura, Austin, and Witt) have made it very clear that they do not like that I write a summary of each board meeting. This isn’t surprising. There has long been a tradition in our district of restricting access to information. This was the issue that mattered most to me when I ran for a seat on the school board. I only have one vote on the board and little influence with the other board members, but my summary of each board meeting since 2020 has shined a light on what the board was doing and created real change. WRTV, the ABC affiliate in Indianapolis, did a news story in 2023 about my push for better community access to school information.
Wang said he supported my proposed revision, stating that email communication between board members should only be used for procedural or informational matters, while decision-making and deliberation should occur in public meetings. He added that the policy serves as a helpful reminder and educational tool for new board members. Wang made a motion to add “in an emergency” as an additional reason board members could use email to communicate.
Voted 3 out of 6 to approve Wang’s revision to add emergency (Austin, Lyle, and Purpura opposed) so it did not pass
Purpura argued that board communication should not be restricted beyond what the law requires. He emphasized that email discussions, which are subject to open door laws, can be valuable for preparing for meetings and deliberations. While agreeing that formal votes shouldn’t occur over email, he believes the proposed language is overly limiting and unnecessarily restricts internal communication.
Yin asked for clarification on whether board members would still be allowed to email questions or suggestions in response to Friday notes or board packets if the proposed policy changes were adopted. Mumford explained that the ISBA guidance is that email should be used for procedural and informational questions, but the intent of the proposed policy is to prevent private board member discussion of issues that should occur in public. When the discussion happens over email, the only way for the public to learn what is going on is by submitting time-consuming public records requests.
Voted 2-1-3 for Mumford’s revision to only use email for procedural or informational questions (Wang and Mumford in favor; Yin abstained; Purpura, Lyle, and Austin opposed)
Voted 4-2 to approve the policy without revisions (Wang and Mumford opposed)
2:03:06 Policy C100 – Entrance Age and Requirements
Voted 6 out of 6
2:05:34 Policy C150 – Homeless Students-Enrollment Rights and Services
Voted 6 out of 6
2:09:13 Policy C200 – Anti-Bullying: Purpura moved to postpone this item until the next meeting due to legal advice that the policy committee would like to review.
Voted 6 out of 6 to postpone
2:10:13 Policies (1st Reading): C175 Student Attendance, Academic Engagement and Truancy Prevention with legal updates and suggested updates, C225 Parental Access to Instructional Material and Surveys, C250 Title I Parent and Family Engagement, C275 Test Security Provisions for Statewide Assessments, C300 Programs for Students with Disabilities and Least Restrictive Environment, C350 Student Discipline, C400 Use of Restraint and Seclusion with Students, C425 Student Suicide Prevention and Awareness, C450 Drug Prevention and Drug Testing, C500 School Trips and Privately Sponsored Activities Involving School Corporation Employees and Students, C525 Medical Needs at School, C550 Student Search and Seizure, C575 Student Homework, C600 Withdrawal from School
2:11:48 Superintendent Report: Greiner said that a draft of the 2027–2028 academic calendar has been created based on stakeholder input and will go to the teachers association before being presented to the board in November. He noted that the bargaining process is ongoing with a shared goal of reaching an agreement by the November 15 deadline. Tennis court work is nearly complete, with a final walkthrough soon, and plans are underway for pickleball logistics and a ribbon-cutting event. Mumford asked Greiner to share about the transfer discussion process. Greiner said that a community-wide survey is being finalized; it will be sent after updated financial data is reviewed by the board. Updated financial information is planned to be presented to the board during the November work session. Following that, the community survey can be sent out to gather input and formally begin the process of hearing from residents.
2:16:10 CFO Report: August Financial Report – Funds, Preliminary September Financial Report – Funds, Cash Flow, Credit Card Statement, Claims Docket Object Breakdown
2:17:10 Board Reports
2:31:38 The meeting was adjourned
Upcoming Public Meetings in the Central Office Board Room, located at 3061 Benton Street:
● Work Session: Monday, November 10, 2025 at 5pm
● Regular Board Meeting: November 10, 2025 at 6pmThis document is my summary of the public school board meeting, not the official meeting minutes. My personal thoughts and opinions are given in italics and represent my own views which do not necessarily reflect those of any other member of the school board. I identify myself as Mumford in the summary but use first person when describing my personal thoughts and opinions. Previous agendas, minutes, and audio recordings can be found at the WLCSC website.
Dacia Mumford 