📜 LADY BUDGETDOWN | BIRMINGHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS
WHEN THE NUMBERS CHANGE, THE QUESTIONS SHOULD FOLLOW. 🪶

Lady Budgetdown has been spending a little more time in Birmingham's facility-planning records. And this rabbit hole goes back further than 2026.

In January 2023, Birmingham's Facility Assessment Committee was presented with a preliminary capacity analysis showing:

7,293 students
9,822 calculated capacity
2,529 excess seats
73% districtwide utilization

The presentation also identified 85% as the recommended utilization benchmark.

At the high-school level alone:
Groves: 1,140 students / 1,846 capacity - 62% utilized
Seaholm: 1,258 students / 1,742 capacity - 72% utilized

Together, the two high schools showed approximately 1,190 excess seats under that methodology.

The stated purpose of the facility process wasn't simply to identify repairs. It included developing a long-range plan for facility usage and maximizing the district's infrastructure and utilization.

And enrollment was already part of the conversation.

THE 2023 ENROLLMENT FORECAST

Plante Moran projected K–12 general-education enrollment would decline to:
2023–24: 6,372
2024–25: 6,270
2025–26: 6,204

We can now check those projections against what actually happened.

The district's 2026 presentation reports actual enrollment of:

2023–24: 6,542
2024–25: 6,468
2025–26: 6,390

In other words, enrollment came in higher than the 2023 forecast each year, by 170, 198 and 186 students respectively. That's useful context. Forecasts aren't promises. They change as circumstances change.

But when a new forecast from the same consultant is helping inform another long-term facilities plan, the performance of the previous forecast seems worth understanding.

And then we arrive at 2026.

THE CAPACITY NUMBERS CHANGED

The 2023 capacity analysis used target class sizes of:

22 — elementary
24 — middle school
26 — high school

The May 2026 analysis uses:

24 — elementary
26 — middle school
28 — high school

That matters.

Increase the assumed number of students assigned to each classroom and the calculated capacity of a building can increase, even without adding another classroom.

But Lady Budgetdown found another problem. The May 5, 2026 facility-utilization slide appears not to reconcile with itself.

The detailed portion reports:

Elementary: 4,680 capacity | 59% utilization
Middle: 2,938 capacity | 61% utilization
High: 3,192 capacity | 60% utilization

Yet the summary on that same slide presents a different set of enrollment, capacity and utilization figures.

For example:

Elementary: 3,305 enrollment / 4,416 capacity / 69% stated utilization

But:

3,305 ÷ 4,416 = approximately 75% — not 69%.

High school shows:

2,237 enrollment / 3,192 capacity / 73% stated utilization

But:

2,237 ÷ 3,192 = approximately 70% — not 73%.

These aren't conclusions about Birmingham's actual building needs. They're arithmetic questions about the information presented to decision-makers.

And then something else happens.

By the June 16, 2026 presentation, the facility-capacity/utilization section appearing in May is no longer included.
The capital proposal, however, moves forward.

$240 MILLION

The proposed plan distributes capital investment across Birmingham's existing school portfolio and includes approximately $23.6 million for Midvale Early Childhood Center, including new construction.

So Lady Budgetdown has some questions.

🪶 Which capacity and utilization figures should the public rely upon, the detailed May figures, the May summary figures, or a subsequently corrected analysis?

🪶 Why did the target classroom assumptions change from 22/24/26 in 2023 to 24/26/28 in 2026, and how much of the change in calculated capacity results from that methodological change?

🪶 Why was the capacity/utilization analysis included in May but not included in the June presentation as the $240 million proposal advanced?

🪶 With enrollment still projected to decline, what alternatives were evaluated before proposing substantial investment across the existing footprint?

Were consolidation, redistricting, repurposing or other right-sizing alternatives modeled?

And perhaps the simplest question:

🪶 Before taxpayers are asked to make another long-term investment in Birmingham's buildings, shouldn't everyone be able to reconcile the numbers being used to determine how much space the district actually needs?

None of this establishes that Birmingham has too many schools. It doesn't establish that a school should close. And it doesn't establish that the proposed improvements aren't needed.

It establishes that there are questions in the underlying facility data that deserve answers before conclusions are drawn from it.

Lady Budgetdown will happily publish the explanation if Birmingham or Plante Moran provides one.

The ledger is stubbornly indifferent.

With receipts and respect. 🪶

Sources: Birmingham Public Schools January 10, 2023 Facility Assessment Committee presentation; May 5, 2026 Capital Improvement Program Update; June 16, 2026 Capital Improvement Program presentation.

Data compiled and visualized by Lady Budgetdown using publicly available records.