It was indeed a school board retreat Monday night as the Winona Area Public School board retreated from the idea of a kindergarten and cluster centers and moved toward the idea of closing an elementary school and redrawing boundary lines as both district enrollment and funding continue to dwindle.

The two-hour meeting was a question-and-answer session designed to discuss the idea of reconfiguring the district's six elementary buildings.

Members agreed the district, with current classroom sizes, needs at least 79 classrooms. There are 96 classrooms in the district.

Much of the retreat focused on closing Central Elementary.

According to district figures, only 43 students living in the Central Elementary attendance boundary go to the school, out of 154 students possible.

"I am sorry to Central people. Central continues to decline and we're already putting community education in there," said board member John Goplen, who attended Central as a student. "The neighborhood around Central is student rentals; there are families there, but it's fewer and fewer."

Board member Brian Neil said that no matter what decision is reached, the results must be transparent for the public to support it.

"We want a data-driven (process)," Neil said.

"We've been data driven for several years. I don't know how much more information I am going to get that's going to help me," Goplen responded.

Board chairwoman Stacey Mounce-Arnold spoke in favor of closing Central.

"I think it's irresponsible if we don't," Mounce-Arnold said.

Yet at least one board member disagreed.

"I am an advocate of keeping Central open," said board member Ted Hazelton. "Would you want to send your kid there if there's a constant threat of

closing it? Closing it, doesn't save a lot. Central has some pretty senior staff which when redistributed bump off other staff."

The board also focused on reshifting students and boundaries in the district to spread out attendance and even class size. The boundary lines have not been reconsidered since 1981.

Board member Greg Fellman argued the decision that needs to be made first is deciding the district's building inventory, before talking about boundaries.

Boardmembers also discussed what might come next if a building was closed.

"It makes no sense to mothball a building," Goplen said. "It would make one less property to maintain. ... The costs of running the district aren't going to get cheaper. How can we maintain? Is it going to be buildings or is it going to be programs? To me, kids come before the buildings."

Not every member was as certain selling a building would mean cashing in on the savings.

"Selling a building is a lot easier said than done," said board member Michelle Langowski.

The board also appeared to cool to the idea of closing more than one elementary school.

"The staff felt it would be irresponsible to close more than one building," said Superintendent Paul Durand. "When you look at extra programming, we couldn't make that recommendation."