Members of a subcommittee studying options for making Lawrence’s public elementary schools more efficient had been interpreting numbers, discussing semantics and outlining visions for nearly two hours when G.R. Gordon-Ross finally settled on a solution.

Not about optimal class sizes. Or locations for buildings. Or balancing costs for renovations against expenses for new construction.

“Everybody wins the lottery,” he said simply, “and turns it over to the schools.”

If only it were that easy.

Members of Gordon-Ross’ and three other subcommittees spent Monday evening inching closer to four focused visions for the future of elementary schools — visions they have been encouraged to see in a realistic light, not ones clouded by wishful thinking.

Such is the work of the district’s combined Lawrence Elementary School Facility Vision Task Force, charged with “recommending a community vision and plan for the school district elementary facilities that reflect the varied community and educational values, given the restraints of current and anticipated district resources.”

The work started in August, and is scheduled to be complete by February.

“Budget considerations for schools are even more conservative than when you began,” said Mike Neal, assistant dean for education administration at Kansas University, who serves as facilitator for the effort. “You’ll have to lean on the side of (being) even more frugal.”

Monday evening, members of each subcommittee pulled up folding chairs to cafeteria-style tables at district headquarters, settling in for a final round of discussions before each group makes its report to one another in two weeks.

Gordon-Ross’ group is looking to find options that ultimately could be forwarded by the task force to members of the Lawrence school board, the elected officials who earlier this year had to cut $4 million from the district’s budget. Nobody’s sure what early 2011 will bring, but the fear is that further cuts lie ahead.

So far, the subcommittee hasn’t settled on an official list. Talk Monday evening focused largely on the size of schools: Bigger ones generally end up being considered more efficient, because they can serve more kids without increasing many administrative costs. A school’s cost per pupil declines as enrollment rises.

“We are saying larger is more efficient,” said Nancy Hays, a subcommittee member who works as a financial analyst at Lawrence Memorial Hospital. “There’s no getting around that.”

But such conclusions will need to be weighed against information compiled by other subcommittees, the ones studying: the physical conditions of school buildings, the “best practices” for operating such buildings, and the overall context for retaining or locating such buildings within neighborhoods.

Larger may be better for the bottom line, but the district needs to be sure it’s doing what’s best for all students, including those who need help most, said Ruben Flores, another subcommittee member who is an assistant professor of American studies at KU.

“Sometimes I think we’re confusing being cost-effective with being cost-efficient,” Flores said.