The Carson City School District Board of Trustees met Tuesday to discuss the nutrition fund deficit, summer school outlooks, the discipline plan and more.
Read the agenda here:
Watch the meeting below:
The big ones:
District fears students are going hungry due to funding cuts, loss of free lunch
Nutrition Services Fund is projecting a $350,000 net deficit for the current year, prompting district staff to voice concerns about the financial feasibility of the program and the number of students potentially going hungry due to rising costs and federal income gaps.
While the projected deficit will be covered by a remaining fund balance—a “rainy day fund” accumulated during the period of universal free meals—administrators warned that the loss of broad free meal access has resurrected the stigma associated with school meals and is hitting financially struggling families the hardest.
Nutrition Services Director Elizabeth Martinez confirmed that the district has already observed a decrease in meal service this year.
carson-city-school-board-approves-food-service-agreement-insurance-and-wellness-policies
Financial Struggles and Growing Debt
The total anticipated revenues of $4.2 million fall short of the $4.6 million budgeted for expenditures, leading to the $350,000 shortfall.
Chief Financial and Operations Officer Spencer Windward noted that salaries and benefits for the department’s 44 positions constitute a “good chunk of our cost.”
Martinez outlined the meal costs, noting that each lunch last year cost approximately $3.60 to make, including food, paper, salaries, and benefits.
Federal reimbursements are currently lowest for paid meals (59 cents).
A major concern is the district’s ability to cover meals for students who cannot pay.
The current unpaid meal debt sits at about $39,000. Although the district has a policy that “if a student requests lunch, we do feed them, so that no one’s turned away,” this practice contributes to the debt.
The district uses an “angel account” fueled by community donations to help pay off this debt.
Martinez noted that while they have “very generous donors,” including one person who sends “a thousand dollars a month to our angel account,” unfortunately, “the debt is growing at a much greater rate than donations are coming in.”
The Stigma and Income Gap
Martinez explained that the return to a paid meal system after the period of universal free meals saw the “stigma came back of only poor kids eat free meals or eat school meals,” leading to decreased participation.
The larger issue identified is the “income gap,” where families earn just enough income to disqualify them from federal assistance programs but not enough to maintain a comfortable household.
“This year I believe a family of four can’t make more than like 47,000 annually gross and qualify for free meals so it’s pretty unrealistic the income guidelines,” Martinez said. “We have a lot of families that fall in that gap where they can’t necessarily afford $7 a day for a high school student to eat breakfast and lunch, but they also don’t qualify for aid.”
Trustee Molly Walt said she was deeply concerned about the students.
“What I would find interesting is to see whether or not, since we aren’t free anymore, if students are going without — and that’s what I think would be important to see, whether or not … students are going without the breakfast or the lunch because it’s not free.”
Future Outlook and CEP Sustainability
Staff cautioned that the viability of the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), which allows high-poverty schools to serve free meals to all students without collecting individual applications, is diminishing.
Superintendent AJ Feuling noted that the direct certification rate (the percentage of families qualifying for federal assistance) has been “falling” unexpectedly.
Martinez warned that because the district relies on specific qualifying rates to renew CEP status every four years, “it is a very real possibility that no schools in our district will be able to operate CEP” by the 2028–2029 school year.
Currently, five elementary schools are able to feed all students for free through CEP: Bordewich, Empire, Fremont, Mark Twain, and Fritsch.
The district is planning new initiatives to encourage applications for free and reduced meals to potentially stabilize the program.
Members of the community wishing to donate to cover student meal debt can send a check to 398 North Richmond Drive, Carson City School District Nutrition Services, specified for the “angel account.”
Trustees talk summer school, note decrease in high school credit deficiency but ask: at what cost?
Trustees also reviewed data on the 2024–2025 Summer School Program, revealing a decrease in high school credit deficiency but spurring a philosophical debate over whether the rapid credit recovery system genuinely educates students or merely passes them.
The informational update, presented by Shana Wooldridge and Carson High School Principal Dan Carstens, highlighted that the number of high school students deemed credit deficient dropped from 452 the previous year to 349, even after summer school credits were accounted for.
The program, designed to help high school students move closer to the 24.5 credits required for a standard diploma, and middle school students earn the necessary five credits for promotion, successfully served 203 high school students and achieved a 98.2% course completion rate overall.
Debate on Efficacy and Equity
A central point of contention among board members was the efficacy of allowing highly motivated students to complete numerous courses in a short, three-week period.
Trustee Matt Claphamasked if the district was compromising learning for speed, stating: “are the kids retaining this information in a three week period? I have to wonder, are we doing what’s best for them versus retaining them? I don’t know the drawbacks… but my concern is: are we just passing them, or are they learning?”
Wooldridge, who architected the program, countered that the courses are designed primarily for students who “sat in that class all year got close to passing but was just not able to pass.”
She stressed that even imperfect recovery helps students avoid deficits in progressive subjects.
“If you failed your algebra class and you go into geometry you’re at a huge deficit,” she said. “So if we can get even closer to having an understanding of algebra for when they’re sitting in their geometry class, they are at a better point,” Wooldridge said. She added that the difficulty of attending summer school often results in “light bulb moments” for students about the importance of regular attendance.
Fee Structure Raises Concerns
The 2024–2025 program marked the first year CCSD required payment for summer courses: $100 per class with a maximum of $200 for two or more, and reduced pricing ($50 per class) for students on reduced lunch.
Despite the fee, Wooldridge noted a “very small percentage” of students actually paid.
The majority of fees were waived because students qualified for assistance, including free or reduced lunch, McKinney-Vento status, English language learner (ELL) status, or special education status (IEPs).
Trustee Mike Walker expressed concern that the paid system could exclude vulnerable populations.
“I just hope we keep that in mind as we go forward,” Walker said. “The families who don’t have a lot of money sometimes are the students who struggle the most. So, as a district, if we have to put our heads together, I want to make sure that we’re not disenfranchising students.”
Long-Term Commitment to Systemic Change
Principal Carstens acknowledged the limitations of credit recovery, calling it a “double-edged sword.”He stressed that solving credit deficiency requires a multi-year effort focused on interventions during the regular school year.
He committed to systemic change, but acknowledged initial results may be slow.
“This is the first year of making big changes—you’re not gonna see a ton of gains,” he said. “It’s that sustained change, the consistency, over the course of three to five years.”
District administrators outlined several initiatives to address academic failure at its roots:
• Intervention Blocks: Expanding in-school intervention time to make resources “more equitable for all students”.
• Parent Engagement: Carstens confirmed the high school is planning at least “one parent engagement night per month throughout the school year” to ensure families understand credit paths and available opportunities, including college, career, and life readiness.
The middle schools also reported interventions, including after-school programs and dedicated intervention courses.
Carson Middle School retained three students for credit deficiency this year, all of whom were chronically absent. Eagle Valley Middle School retained two students.
Trustees approve new discipline plan
Trustees voted to adopt the Restorative Discipline Plan for the 2025–2026 school year. The model emphasizes teaching and intervention over punitive measures for student behavior.
The plan is required by state law (NRS 392.4644),and was presented by Christy Perkins, who noted that the district operates with an MTSS (Multi-Tiered System of Supports) model, prioritizing “prevention and prevention behavior… rather than a consequence based system”.
Policy Shift: From ‘Contract’ to ‘Plan’
The most significant revision in this year’s document was the removal of the word “contract” in disciplinary procedures, which has been replaced with “plan”.
Perkins explained the change reflects current research showing “contracts are highly ineffective with students.”
Instead of simply having a student sign a promise not to repeat a behavior, the new framework focuses on layering supports.
“So let’s say a student is engaging in inappropriate behavior, or they’re fighting,” Perkins said. “We might suspend them for three days and then our first intervention might be that Saturday school intervention … Then you come back, you get in another fight. Rather than just having the student sign a contract that says I won’t get in any more fights… we change that plan, we tweak the plan.”
She said in this case, a plan might be to walk to the student from class to class, or require the student to eat lunch inside, because “they lose their temper during that time.”
“So we add more layers to the plan rather than just signing a contract”.
The plan emphasizes modifying adult responses to behavior while working with the student to continue their learning, focusing on teaching more “pro-social behaviors.”
Parent Accountability and Intervention
The discussion included a candid debate about the limits of the district’s ability to hold parents accountable for issues like chronic absenteeism.
Trustee Molly Walt questioned when parents would be held accountable for a student’s lack of success, asking, “when is it that we turn around and say ‘you have to have some accountability; get your kid to school.’ There has to be something.”
Perkins confirmed that in extreme cases of student absenteeism, particularly at the elementary level, where it is “usually a parent problem,” the district pursues interventions against the parent, not the student.
• Legal Action: The district will proceed with a SARB (Student Attendance Review Board), supported by the district attorney, where “the family or the parent is cited not the student.”
• DCFS Referral: The district also makes calls to the Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) if staff feels the situation constitutes “educational neglect.”
Perkins also highlighted the severity of absenteeism, noting that research shows “if you are chronically absent one year between eighth grade and your senior year, you are seven times more likely to not graduate.”
Safety and Positive Outcomes
The restorative approach aims to ensure a “safe and connected school statement” where students feel secure enough to learn.
The plan also details the use of the district’s safety alert system.
• Safe Voice Tool: The district utilizes Safe Voice, a 24-hour online and phone reporting tool, which alerts the school principal, social worker, and law enforcement (Sergeant Mayor’s) immediately for urgent safety issues, such as students who are suicidal.
• Behavioral Success: Early results for the current school year suggest positive behavioral changes, with Carson High School specifically reporting zero physical fights this school year.
The plan requires review by a team composed of administration, staff, and often parents, with 75 members participating in this year’s review.
The board unanimously approved the plan.
