The possibility of Palo Alto opening a third high school looks a lot less likely after Tuesday night’s school board meeting, during which school board members spoke out in support of implementing more specialized programs within the existing high schools.

The High School Task Force, led by former Palo Alto High School principal Scott Laurence, asked the school board to consider removing the possibility of opening a third high school from the task force’s agenda, and the board unanimously agreed to do so.

The task force was created to help the district accommodate the 4,600 students that are expected to be enrolled at Gunn and Paly by 2018. The three options that the task force was originally designed to consider were growing the high schools to hold 2,300 or more students each; opening a third comprehensive high school; or creating a smaller, more specialized school or schools.

Laurence told that board that the scope of the task force was too large and that the task force needed to focus on the needs of the students that were not being adequately served by the existing high school system, an estimated 10 to 30% of the student body.

“We [the high school task force] really believe that this gives us a good opportunity to talk about high school students and programs,” Laurence said. “There’s no doubt that we have two great comprehensive high schools. But we don’t suit every student’s need. Students learn differently, and we need to present alternatives to students who learn in a different way.”

New superintendent Kevin Skelly defended the idea of expanding the existing two high schools, but not creating a third high school, because of the difficulty in creating another high school that could provide opportunities matching those at Paly and Gunn.

“It’s our view that two high schools with other [specialized] programs is a better solution for us and a better idea in terms of our work,” Skelly said. “We believe that we’re better served by thinking about our options with two comprehensive high schools instead of three. All the opportunities that a comprehensive high school has would have to be provided for a third high school.”

Board member Mandy Lowell had concerns about the effects of possible overcrowding on the high schools and their ability to provide opportunities for all students.

“We have more kids and we need to squish them onto our high schools,” Lowell said. “Is the high school task force looking at not merely replicating what we’re doing now for more students? Will adding students to a campus compromise educational quality?”

Laurence responded to Lowell’s questions by assuring her that the task force would consider the needs of each student and provide “site flexibility to go in the ways they [the teachers] need to go, if we add two or three or 400 more students.”

Although these concerns have removed the possibility of a third high school for now, the option is by no means permanently sidelined.

“I think it would be helpful for a public clarification that we’re not, in fact, ruling out the possibility of a third high school at some point in the future,” board member Bard Mitchell told the board.

The high school task force will present its findings to the board this December.