School board narrowly approves Newton’s 2025-2026 school year calendar

Disagreements over the approval of Newton’s 2025-2026 school year calendar — which narrowly passed in a 4-3 vote — largely focused on combining spring break and Easter break, professional development days for teachers and the feedback the district received from teachers and community members.

Superintendent Tom Messinger said the district received 71 responses from its school year calendar survey. Many of the overlapping comments were shared in an infographic during the Jan. 27 school board meeting. The most repeated comment came from six individuals who disliked having two weeks off in winter.

“Some of the specific comments on that did have to do with the fact that there might be a way to get out earlier in the spring if we didn’t have the two full weeks off there,” Messinger said. “There were five people (all staff members) who put that they did like having two full weeks off at Christmas.”

Other responses wanted more early-out days or additional time off before Thanksgiving, built in snow days in the calendar, no school on Martin Luther King Jr. Day or even a four-day school week for students. Some said there were too many Mondays off school or that there were too many early outs in the first week.

Of those 71 who responded to the survey, 49 people approved the calendar as proposed while 22 people disapproved. Messinger said even through some of the comments showed a dislike towards certain details in the proposed calendar, it did not necessarily mean they did not approve of it.

According to the 2025-2026 calendar, the school year would begin for students on Aug. 25 and end on May 29, 2026, three days after Memorial Day.

In the event of inclement weather cancelling school, the calendar states that both students and staff make up all snow days at the end of the school year.

Jess Rother, a Cardinal mom to three kids in Woodrow Wilson Elementary, suggested the district get kids out of school before Memorial Day, which is observed on the last Monday in May. She said a number of families are already planning summer vacations around that time or are in “summer mode.”

“Some suggestions to make that possible would be to shorten spring break to possibly maybe just do it Friday through Monday, or build it into an Easter break,” Rother said. “…I know that what teachers need comes into play in this as well, but if it’s possible to eliminate early outs I don’t know how big of a priority that is.”

Still, Rother argued removing early outs or excessive professional development days could be a way to work in those extra hours. She said there could also be ways to build in snow make-up days, like making students and teachers come to school on Presidents’ Day.

“I think the kids should come in school on Presidents’ Day learning about the presidents that we observe and celebrate for our great country,” Rother said.

School board members Robyn Friedman, Kristi Meyer and Ray Whipple voted against the approval of the 2025-2026 school year calendar. Whipple disagreed with having a professional development day in September when there are three consecutive professional development days in August.

“We can’t skip September without a PD day?” Whipple said. “And I’m with her on combining Easter and spring breaks. Even moving the PD days in August … move them ahead of the teacher workdays. I mean what sense does it make to have teacher workdays and then your PD?”

Messinger said many of the professional development days in August were tied to the mandatory tasks before the school year starts. The superintendent also addressed a comment brought up in the survey feedback that said school should be able to start earlier. Districts are restricted from doing that thanks to state law.

However, Messinger said legislators may change that rule in the near future.

Friedman said a number of school districts have opted to have the day off for MLK Day, but Newton has not. To her, it seems like it is more accepted now to take off MLK Day for both students and staff. For Presidents’ Day, too, she suggested a consistent approach is for the best.

Either they both are considered holidays and no one comes to school, or the district requires students and staff to come to school on those days.

Whipple agreed with Friedman’s sentiments.

Part of the challenge in reviewing the calendar, Meyer said, is making sure it makes sense through the lenses of teachers and families.

School board member Cody Muhs argued a committee was formed to tackle this subject and many of these questions and concerns were brought up, and he didn’t want to discredit their work. Which is why he moved forward with a motion to approve the 2025-2026 school year calendar.

Still, there was some scrutiny over the calendar committee itself. Messinger said the calendar committee had no parents on it and was largely comprised of staff members. School board Donna Cook was not OK with that. Messinger said at one point the School Improvement Advisory Committee handled the calendar.

“When I started calling people up and inviting people in on it, the one answer I heard over and over from people was: ‘We’re not going to be a part of it if we’re going to talk about the calendar,’” Messinger said of his experience trying to recruit members for SIAC. “…We opted to go out and get public feedback.”

Messinger said the district “advertised the heck” out of the survey to solicit feedback from the public. The district accepted comments over one week staring Jan. 14 and ending Jan. 19. Staff reviewed the feedback the week of Jan. 20 and then presented the 71 responses at the Jan. 27 school board meeting.

Friedman asked what would happen if the new calendar was not approved by the school board. Messinger said it would return to the committee with the board’s input for another try. From there another calendar would be created and submitted to the school board for approval.