For the first time Monday night the elementary redistricting committee got to work on the second of two maps it will present to the school board Monday night: Map B.

The committee had less than an hour during the meeting to suggest possible changes to Map B, though they had worked on it some in previous meetings. They will meet again Thursday night at 6 p.m. at the Board of Education offices to further tweak Map B, which will be presented along with another map known as Map A.

Both maps will be presented to the board at a special meeting Monday at 7 p.m. at McIntosh High School.

Though no public comments will be accepted at that board meeting, they will be accepted at a meeting Monday, Nov. 26 at the Whitewater High School auditorium, also at 7 p.m. It’s likely that citizens will get three minutes each to speak at that meeting, said Assistant School Superintendent Sam Sweat.

While Map A includes the closing of East Fayette Elementary School, Map B leaves the system’s oldest facility open, which affects population figures at Spring Hill, Sara Harp Minter, Brooks and the new Inman Elementary School.

While closing East Fayette, Map A changes include:

• Spring Hill would lose 290 of its current students to Minter and gain 327 students from East Fayette.

• Minter would lose 280 of its current students to the Inman school and lose 110 students to Brooks while gaining 85 students from Peeples Elementary.

• Inman would open with 215 students from East Fayette and 280 students from Minter.

• Kedron Elementary would gain 203 students from Peachtree City Elementary

• Huddleston would lose approximately 70 students to Oak Grove Elementary.

Under Map B, with East Fayette remaining open:

• East Fayette would go from 535 students currently to 378.

• Sara Harp Minter would go from 649 students to 435.

• Spring Hill would go from 529 students to 444.

• Brooks Elementary would go from 300 students to 416.

• Inman would open with 421 students.

In all other aspects than mentioned directly above, Map B is exactly the same as Map A. Map B is also very likely to change at least somewhat at Thursday’s meeting, Sweat said Tuesday morning.

Some committee members spoke out Monday that their school’s parents will be unhappy if Map A is adopted.

Stephanie Washington said that anywhere from one-half to three-quarters of the current students at Minter would be moved, and she presented a petition from parents opposing the redistricting changes.

“This is a very difficult situation for us,” Washington said.

Melissa Watlington said she was also compelled to remind the committee that some of the neighborhoods currently enrolled at Huddleston Elementary live within two-tenths to three-tenths of a mile of the school and would adversely be affected by the redistricting as proposed.

“Please open that for discussion,” Watlington said.

Mary Beth Crumly, the representative for Spring Hill, said the committee shouldn’t present Map A to the board “when there is so much resistance” to it.

Still another committee member expressed frustration with the accusations that have been flying against her and the rest of the committee.

Casey Messina of Whitewater Middle School said she has been offended by statements from some citizens that the committee “has ruined the lives of their children ... and is hurting their property values.”

“It’s gotten way out of hand,” Messina said, noting that the committee has taken time away from their families to do the work and “to help your children.”

“They will grow and adapt, and they will learn that change happens ... as long as we parents embrace it and make it positive.” Messina said.

When they left the building, committee members were allowed to take home their background information packets for the first time throughout the entire process.

Previously the committee members were required to turn in the packets at the end of each meeting so they could be left at the board office.