Call it a midstream mandate.

It was only a month ago that Butler School Board voted 7-2 to launch Plan 4B, a consolidation that would close five of Butler School District’s 11 elementary schools.

Then two weeks later something momentous happened: the spring primary election. Incumbent board member Bill Halle, who opposed the consolidation, won nominations on both parties’ ballots; while incumbent Don Pringle, who favored Plan 4B, lost on both tickets to four newcomers, all of whom oppose the plan. Three other members who voted in favor did not seek re-election; the remaining four board members’ terms expire two years from now.

That means six people who will make up two-thirds of the school board in December — incumbents Halle and John Conrad, plus Leland Clark, Jennifer Cummings, Suzie Hammonds-Bradrick and Nina Teff — oppose 4B.

They’re pressing what they see as a clear mandate. Halle, Conrad and the four candidates who expect to be elected have asked current board members to stop the consolidation.

In a letter to the board, all six point out their united opposition. They comprise a supermajority. They don’t oppose consolidation. They don’t question the need to close some buildings as a multiyear trend of declining enrollment continues. They just don’t like the way it’s being handled, or that it’s being attempted so swiftly.

They’re also sensitive to an alternative plan that appears to have community backing. Instead of converting the elementary schools to grades K-4, with fifth- and sixth-graders attending the existing junior high building downtown, grades 7-9 in the existing intermediate high school and grades 10-12 in the senior high building, they prefer keeping grades K-6 in the elementaries and getting rid of the junior high building.

Part of their letter to the board reads: “The current board and administration had from last September until this May to convince the people to support Plan 4B and failed to do so. It is our firm belief that the people’s dissatisfaction with Plan 4B will only grow as it is hastily implemented over the next few months. In December, the people will expect us to follow through with what they elected us to do.”

Halle says it’s customary from a legal standpoint for lame-duck boards to refrain from making any far-reaching decisions that would impact new boards.

“So since the majority of the board in December would be against this plan ... We’re asking to put the plan on hold, he said. “In other words, stop the consolidation and then let the new board take up a new consolidation plan.”

Their letter further states that even if the current board ignores their request and implements Plan 4B, the new board will reverse their action.

The school board is scheduled to discuss the letter at its meeting Monday. They should give careful consideration to the concerns and demands of the new board members, as well as those of the electorate who voted for them.

Their alternative would be for the current board and administration to continue explaining and refining Plan 4B. There’s still three months left, before the new school year starts, for them to accomplish what the new board says they failed to do over the previous nine months — win the public’s support.