Dear Members of the School Board,

We are writing as a group of concerned parents to express our deep concern regarding the proposed changes to the district’s elementary music program. While we support thoughtful efforts to expand access to music education, we are troubled that the current plan appears to do so at the expense of program quality, equity, and student opportunity—particularly for our 4th and 5th grade students.

Based on information shared with families, the proposed changes would significantly reduce and restructure music instruction in upper elementary grades without meaningful input from key stakeholders, including teachers and parents. These decisions, which will have lasting impacts on students’ educational experiences, appear to be moving forward without sufficient transparency or community engagement.

Specifically, we are concerned that:

4th grade students would no longer have the opportunity to choose and begin learning an instrument, as instruction would shift to general music only. At the same time, the number of sections district-wide would be reduced from 48 to 27.

5th grade students would be placed into large, non-homogeneous beginning ensembles, with a reduction from 42 to 27 sections district-wide. This raises serious concerns about instructional quality and the ability to meet students at varying skill levels.

The proposed staffing model—approximately three music teachers serving as many as 1,500 students at Lincoln, 1,000 at JAMS, and 700 at SMASH/Will Rogers—creates significant inequities in access and support across campuses.

Students without access to private lessons or outside resources will be disproportionately impacted, losing a critical pathway to reach intermediate proficiency by middle school. This may also limit participation in valued programs such as elementary Stairway ensembles.

Many campuses lack appropriate facilities and resources to support expanded music programming in lower grades, including adequate space for movement, instruments, and instructional materials.

We are also concerned that available funding sources, including Measure R and Proposition 28, do not appear to be fully leveraged to preserve program quality while expanding access. This raises important questions about prioritization and long-term vision.

Music education is not simply an enrichment activity—it is a foundational component of a well-rounded education that supports cognitive development, creativity, discipline, and community. The current proposal risks shifting the program from one that emphasizes depth and quality to one focused primarily on breadth, without sufficient infrastructure to support that transition.

We respectfully urge the Board to pause approval of these changes and engage in a more inclusive and transparent planning process. This should include meaningful input from educators, parents, and community members, as well as a thorough evaluation of how to expand access without diminishing the quality and equity of the program.

Our community values music education deeply, and we ask that any changes reflect that commitment.