[Music] Good evening. I would like to call to order this Anoka Henipin School Board meeting for today, October 27th, 2025.
Please join the board in pledging our allegiance. >> I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> All right. Our first order of business is to approve the board agenda. Is there a motion to approve the board agenda as presented? >> So moved. >> Thank you, Director Langenfeld. Do we have a second?
Thank you, Director Adet. Um, is there any discussion? >> All right. Hearing none, the acting clerk, uh, Casey Duchaine will call the role, please. >> Director Simon, >> I. >> Director Hulman,
>> I. >> Director Adet. >> Director Langenfeld. >> Hi. >> Director Dashaine is I. Uh, Coacher Arco >> I. With six in favor and zero opposed, the agenda is approved. Members, our next order of business is
recognitions with item 4A. Um, NAMM Foundation Best Communications for Music Education 2025 award. Welcome Dr. Annette Ziggler or Ziggler, sorry, assistant superintendent for secondary schools, and Ryan Palmer, music teacher at Rapids High School.
>> Good evening, co-chairs Arco and Dasha, members of the school board, and superintendent McIntyre. Tonight, we're proud to recognize our one of our band directors in the school district from Rapids High School, Ryan Palmer, whose leadership and dedication to music education has helped our district along with others earn our NAM best uh
communities of music education award. This is the 11th year that our district has received this honor and I'm very excited and thrilled to have Ryan give you more information about it. >> Good evening, members of the board. Thank you, Assistant Superintendent Ziegler, for the invitation to share and
celebrate with you tonight. My name is Ryan Palmer. I am the curriculum support teacher for secondary music and I am proud to teach music at Rapids High School. I am excited to share with you for the 11th year now the In Noa Henipin School District is the recipient of the best communities of music education
award presented by the National Association of Music Merchants Foundation. This award is designed to recognize and celebrate schools and districts for their support and commitment to music education and their efforts to assure access to music for all students as part of a well-rounded
education. for th from this board. This has been demonstrated in recent years through your support uh in adjusting the seventh and eighth grade um arts electives requirements to align to the expectations of the state standards as well as in your support in new instrumental and vocal courses at the
high school level. Through all the struggles of the recent years, Anoka Henipin music teachers have continued to demonstrate our commitment to our students, our community, and to our art. Our music teachers have had the vision to continue providing amazing opportunities and experiences for our
students. We generate positive school culture through events and performances. We celebrate with our schools and communities. We perform in leading venues. We put on award-winning performances. And we even travel the country and the world as ambassadors of
our district. The best communities of music education award is a recognition of the resilience, passion, and compassion of our music teachers across the district. Our music teachers hold a vision of what an NOA Henipin music could look like and we strive for that every day. We challenge our students,
our colleagues, and ourselves to uphold that vision and to ensure that all of our decisions are leading us closer to it. While our programs already see some successes, we have a vision where we don't just survive, but where we thrive. We see a future where music is available
to all students for the duration of their time in the district regardless of expertise, experience, or financial ability. We see our auditoriums, gymnasiums, and our stages full of student musicians. We see a school environment where we tell every student that yes, you can and that we have the
resources to back that up. We have a vision. Uh we have a vision and we strive for it every day. And that's an important reason why we have earned this award. We are ready and excited to work with you towards building an even stronger system of music education within our district. When we watch our
music students graduate and go off into the world, we know full well that only a few of them will find their career in music. We know that more of them will continue making music uh in some form or another. And we also know that all of them will appreciate the world and music around them in a deeper and more
profound way. We know that music for music's sake is valuable. We also know that our work is even greater than music's uh uh I'm sorry, greater than the music we teach. As my prefer uh personal philosophy states, I don't
teach music, I teach people. Music classrooms teach resilience, patience, and persistence. We teach how to accomplish great things without shortcuts. And we teach what hard work looks and feels like. We teach what it means to listen to the people around us,
to hear them, to understand them, and to find common ground with them all, while making space for our own voices. These are all skills that our students need. These are skills that will help them function well throughout their lives. Music education provides all of that because music education is human
education. Members of the board and all school administrators present, it is with my deepest gratitude that I thank you for the work that has already been done in support of music education. Yet there is still more work ahead of us. There is a wealth of skill, knowledge, and ability found in your music educators, and this
award is proof of that. We do this work with enthusiasm, joy, and commitment because music education matters. Thank you. >> Thank you. And congratulations. >> Thank you. Members,
um the next item on our agenda is item five, the consent agenda. As normal, members can remove items for separate consideration and discussion if that's their desire. Is there a motion to accept the consent agenda? Oh, >> sorry about that. >> Yep.
>> Maybe we can fit right here. I think could work out well. Thank you. [Applause] [Music] Sorry about that. All right. So, as normal, u members can remove
items for separate consideration and discussion if that's their desire. So, is there a motion to accept the consent agenda as presented? Thank you, Director Adet. Um, is there a second? >> Thank you, Director Langenfeld. Is there
any discussion? >> All right. Hearing none, will act will the acting clerk um please call the role? >> Director Simon >> I. >> Director Hookman >> I. >> Director Adet. >> Hi. >> Director Langenfeld. >> I. >> Deshaine is I. Co-chair Arco
>> I. All right. With six in favor and zero opposed, the consent agenda is approved. So, our next agenda item is item six, the communications, delegations, and petition section of our meeting.
Um, this is a this is the time for community members to provide input directly to the school board about issues that fall within the school board's authority. We plan this agenda item for 15 minutes. Our policy allows for committee members to speak for up to five minutes, but if there are several persons that want to speak, the chair has the discretion to reduce the time to
comment, to hear from all, and also to keep the meeting on schedule. So during times of large community input, we have been flexible in allowing the meeting to run late. Tonight we have uh nine cards. So to keep the meeting on time, I will ask individuals to keep their comments
to two minutes. I will ask um co-chair Duchaine to monitor a timer and if you run over your time, she will ask you to wrap up your comments quickly. We will we welcome written testimony if you have more to say than time allows and please complete a yellow card and provide it to
Miss Ball so that we can provide a written follow-up. A couple of procedural reminders. Our meeting participation procedures are in place to asssure open and orderly public comments as well as to protect the due process and privacy rights of individuals under the law. Mr. Speakers, use specific names of students, staff, or board
members. I will need to interrupt and or stop the speaker. Please remember to direct your comments to the school board chair. Members of the audience, please listen respectfully. If the board cannot hear member or hear speakers, I may reset the timer to allow speakers to be heard. Audience members that disrupt
this portion may be asked to leave for the remainder of the meeting. So, with all of that being said, please welcome our first speaker, Carol Zimmerman. Welcome to the board. Good evening, members of the board. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Carol
Zimmerman. This is my 36th year of teaching, 34 years in the area of special ed, and 16 years at Lincoln. We all know that the insurance premiums have increased dramatically. For most of us teachers, we're taking home less than
we did last year. When dedicated educators have to choose between staying a job they love and being able to afford health care for their families, something is deeply wrong. When the Anoka Henipin teachers struggle to
decide whether to go to the doctor when someone in their family is sick or not because of the cost, something is deeply wrong. This problem is directly tied to the growing teacher shortage we're seeing, not just statewide, but right here in
our own district. Fewer people are entering the profession, and experienced teachers are leaving because they cannot make ends meet. Every unfilled position means larger class sizes, less individual attention for students, and a
greater in greater burden for the teachers who remain. Because of the shortage, we're hiring teachers that are not educated in the area that they are supposed to be teaching, which decreases the quality of our entire district. If
we want to attract and keep quality educators, we must invest in them. That means increasing salaries to offset insurance costs and to reflect the essential work teachers do every day.
Our schools cannot succeed without qualified motiv motivated teachers and we as teachers deserve to be able to support our own families while we are supporting the students.
Thank you for listening and for continuing to advocate for the people who make our school strong. >> Thank you for your comment. Please welcome our next speaker, John Wallopter. [Applause]
Board members, Superintendent McIntyre, the educators of Anoka Henipin are here again tonight to implore you to address the crushing cost of health care for employees across the district. Everyone in this room wants the students of Anoka Henipin to succeed. Everyone in this
room wants to have the most dedicated and qualified educators working with the students of Anokenipin. This board has made improving employee recruitment and retention a strategic priority. We live in a time when this district does compete with other
districts to recruit and retain educators. The current parameters you have provided your team will not maintain a noanipin as a destination employer. Rather, without action by this board to provide your team with the parameters needed to
settle our contract, Anoka Henipin will become an outlier among metro districts, a place where employees cannot afford health insurance and where aspiring educators will choose to work elsewhere. Tonight, we have postcards directly from
the noipin educators for you. These postcards share the pleas, stories, and impacts that educators are currently experiencing. We ask that you take the time to read them and consider how you, as a board,
can address the needs presented. This board can choose to settle contracts in a way that recognizes the amazing work employees do every day. This board can adopt a budget that accounts for the real cost of healthare rather than artificially low estimates.
This board can ensure the students of Inokeen have the best educators to guide their learning every day by making a position in this district a sought after achievement. Inaction is action. Please rise to meet the moment before you and preserve the
reputation of excellence that Anoka Henipin has historically held. Thank you. [Applause]
Thank you for your comments. Please welcome our next speaker, Melinda Pearson. >> Welcome to the board. >> Thank you. Good evening, co-chairs Arco and Deshaine, board members, and Superintendent McIntyre. My name is Melinda Pearson and I live in
Rapids. My son is an eighth grader at Northdale Middle School and I myself am a graduate of Champlain Park. This district is deeply important to me. It was where I spent my formative years and where I am watching my son receive
the highest quality education. What makes this district so special isn't its size, the number of buildings, the number of students it serves, or even its excellent athletic programs. It's the teachers. Every day when my son comes home from
school, he tells me about his day. Every single class period he talks about includes talking about a special lesson a teacher created for his class or something that impacted him. Whether it's his ELA teacher having a Socratic seminar in his class or his band teacher
pushing him to try harder pieces and take on that solo. I could go on and on about the sort of challenging and impressive education that my son is receiving through the diligent work of these amazing educators. In the interest of time, I won't. The point is that that
these educators do incredible things for the children and families of Andover, Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, Rapids, Champlain, Dayton, Ham Lake, and Ramsay. and they deserve the dignity and respect of a livable
wage and access to health care that is affordable to take care of their own families. The people in this room deserve to work for an employer who provides them with health care that won't require them to take on second jobs. I urge you to do what is right by the extraordinary educators in this room and all over the
district. Please approve a budget and reach a tenative agreement with these educators that makes their affordable their healthcare affordable. Thank you. Thank you for the comments. Please welcome our next speaker, Edwin Cthrade.
[Applause] Um, Edwin Cthrade. Thank you. Welcome to the board. Thank you. My name is Edwin Kraati and I want to and I go to Anoka High School. I want to talk about the policy of tests
being worth 90% of our grade. I feel like it's unfair that tests are worth such a high percentage and that daily work doesn't count. If people think that work doesn't count, it tempts them not to do the assignment, which makes me feel upset. I'm also frustrated when I
look at my grades in student view. I'll give you an example of math. I see that I have 100% in all my daily assignments. But when I did the test, I got 11.5 out of 16 and dropped my grade from a A+ to a C minus. If this continues to happen
where tests are worth so high, people won't feel smart. They will feel anxious, depressed, have a low GPA, and even possibly failing to graduate. Some kids are good on tests, but a lot of others aren't, like me. And I study a lot. It would be more fair if tests are
worth 60% of your grade, 30% of of daily work, which includes projects, and 10% quizzes. I do appreciate though that I can retake tests because it helps me understand it better and feel smart. Last year at St. Stevens, I got A's and
B's. And even if I didn't do well in the test, my D grade didn't go down so low, mainly because school work and tests were counted fairly. Thank you. Thank you for the comments. Um, please welcome our next speakers,
Christina and Jake Cathrad. >> Welcome to the board. >> You're getting the whole family tonight. >> Good evening everybody. My name is Jake Krady and this is my wife Christina. We are parents of Eddie who just spoke at and he's a nth grader
at Noa High School. Christina has been an educator on the Noah Henipin since 2002. Our son Eddie is bright, curious, and resilient, but his experiences highlight gaps within the Noah Henipin school system. We invite you to reflect on whether the district truly fulfills
its mission statement last revised in 2004 which commits to meeting individual student needs, monitoring achievement, partnering with parents, ensuring safety, and using resources efficiently. We've identified three areas of concern. Trust, curriculum access, and
communication. These concerns are systemic, not tied to any individual school. So number one, trust. People do their best when they feel seen and understood. Real trust occurs when words and actions align and when families, students, and staff feel safe to speak
up. Number two, curriculum access. Eddie receives special education services for listening comprehension disability, which makes it very difficult for him to process and remember information presented orally. He is currently taking AP geography. Because the 2014 textbook
is out of date, Edpuzzle is being used. It does not offer the printed materials Eddie needs. We've also heard conflicting information about whether the AMSCO 2020 textbook is approved, being used, or even available to all students. In addition, although new
social studies textbooks in some courses were approved by the board in May 2025, the board uh directed to district or directed the district to continue using the 2011 state standards. A AP geography follows college board standards. Delays
in adopting new materials. Due to disagreements over state standards should not prevent students from accessing current AP resources. Number three, communication and grading consistency. Noah Henipin has replaced standardbased grading with a 100point scale at the secondary level. The
communication did not include that 9010 grading model where 90% of the grades come from end of unit assessments is being used. Please conclude your remarks. Thank you. >> Was that >> It's two minutes. If you would finish your remarks. Thank you. >> This is how the 9010 system affects
students like Eddie. He has an A in algebra dropped to a C minus after missing just four and a half points on a 16point test despite earning 100% on daily work. Such drastic drops in GPA, college eligibility, and scholarship opportunities. Uh where do you want me to? A student's
success should not depend on how persistent their parents are. Meeting the individual needs of all in Noah Henipin students must go beyond public statements and website communication. It requires actionable practices and transparent communication from mo from both the district and the school board.
This is how trust is built in our community. >> Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Um, our next speaker is Michael Wall. Welcome to the board. Good evening board members,
Superintendent McIntyre. My name is Michael Wall and I'm a relatively new teacher to law enforcement at STEPP, the secondary technical education program. I recently came out of law enforcement, the legal, and military to teach at
STEPPP. It is because of this experience I'm able to teach at STEP. However, for the last 20 years, I have been a part of the In Noa Henipin School District as a spouse of a teacher and a father of Anoka Henipin graduates, as well as one
who is currently a teacher at Roosevelt Middle School. I've seen many changes come to education through the eyes of my wife and my children. The one constant I've seen is her and my daughter's
commitment to the students and the professionalism they display for a career they chose. When I had the opportunity to join my wife's profession, I talked with her about changing professions and some of the
concerns I had about coming into teaching. One concern I had was about the income and the benefits. Over the years of watching my wife and other countless teachers teach, I have seen them take a pay freeze and minimal
raises, all the while maintaining their commitment to building a strong school and putting kids first in the Anoka Henipin School District. The pattern of minimizing the professionalism of teachers has transcended many school boards and you
are not unique in that regard. Currently, we are one of the lucky families that are paying approximately $1,000 per month for our insurance. I say we are lucky because many of my colleagues are paying well more than me.
We only have this benefit because my wife and I teach in the district. You are a bore as a board want to put our kids first and build strong schools. You have an opportunity to be unique. Please begin concluding your remarks.
Thank you. >> Negotiate an equitable contract for the teachers of Anoka Henipin School District. We can stand together as a school district and staff if we put the goals and give the power
to your negotiating team for the equitable contract. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your comments. Um, please welcome our next speaker, Paul Anderson. Welcome to the board. >> Good evening. Uh, Superintendent
McIntyre, co-chairs to Shane and Erico, members of the board. My name is Paul Anderson and I'm the principal at Madison Elementary School in Blaine. This is my 33 32nd year in education with 22 of those years being spent here in Noa Henipin serving as an administrator in three different
elementary buildings. Tonight I am not here as an individual sharing my own perspective. I am speaking on behalf of all 26 elementary principles. All 26 elementary principles have endorsed this message. We appreciate the complexity of the budgeting process and the difficult
choices you're going to have to make in the near future. We have been involved throughout the process. Tonight, however, you will hear another option, option three, which you requested from district leadership after rejecting other options. As you prepare
to hear this new option, I want to make one unified message very clear. The elementary principles in this district do not support option three. We understand that reductions have to be made, but our collective analysis shows that option three places an unsustainable burden on parts of our
system. Several of the proposed cuts in this option go directly against the recommendations of your elementary leaders. More importantly, these cuts will have an immediate and direct negative impact on our students and their learning. Several cuts in option three directly contradict the idea of
protecting the classroom. Instead, they will cut into the core of what we do on a daily basis to impact student learning. These reductions, like the significant reduction of FTE from our literacy and math specialists, for one example, will be felt in elementary
classrooms on day one. We unanimously reject this option. We request that you examine option three very closely, ask questions, seek to understand exactly the prop what the proposed cuts would mean for our students and our teachers.
We ask that you prioritize alternatives, including prior options that were agreed upon recommendations from your K12 building leaders. We are willing to continue this conversation with any one of you and as always, you are welcome in our elementary buildings anytime. Thank you.
>> Thank you for your comments. Uh thank you for your comments. Uh please welcome our next speaker, Jeannie Leak. >> Welcome to the board. >> Thank you. >> My name is Jeannie Leak. I have been a dedicated educator in Anoka Henipin
since 1994. I am currently teaching math at Oakview Middle School. At 53, I am far from retirement and my family of five depends primarily on my salary. I am profoundly frustrated that we are once again
working without a contract. This has been our status since July. This is not an anomaly. It is a pattern. In the last cycle, this delay lasted nine months during which the district acred interest on wages that my colleagues and I should
have earned. This is disrespectful and financially damaging. Our historic raise from the last round was entirely consumed by inflation and a new $3,500 premium for our family's highdeductible health plan. The financial strain this
places on educators is real. It is demoralizing to feel that educators are blamed for the budget crisis. While our superintendent, the second highest paid in the state, receiving perks like a car allowance that exceeds my own car payment, it is disheartening to see the
district's budget priorities like these while my family struggles to make ends meet. I am no longer willing to worry about the district's finances when leadership is compensated so generously. And all the while, the public views
teacher salaries as the cause for the district's budget issues. In the past, I have been reluctant to consider a strike. I am no longer reluctant and would vote to strike if asked today. My
my family's financial stability must be the priority. I work too hard to be treated this way and so does every other teacher that I know. Thank you for this time to speak on such an important topic.
[Applause] Thank you for your comments. Um, please welcome our final speaker speaker, Emily Newarth.
Welcome to the board. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, co-chairs, uh, members of the board, and Mr. Superintendent. My name is Emily Newarth, and I'm a Noah Henipin teacher, or parent, not a teacher. Uh, you might remember me from the last time I spoke in front of the board, and I just
totally broke down in tears uh, over the discussions of our curriculum. I think it just shows how much our community cares and the teacher about our teachers and our students. I wanted to express my support for our teachers and their right to life in the pursuit of happiness
through quality insurance. Better insurance means more teacher retention and attracting top talent. I also wanted to remind everyone who is present and watching online that the schoolboard election is coming up on November 4th. This local election is important and can
be decided by a few dozen votes or sometimes less. Every vote matters and I support the candidates endorsed by parents for good and you may find more on their Facebook site. I proudly casted for my vote for the current district 6 school board member through early
voting. So you can either early vote or don't forget to vote by November 4th. Thank you. [Applause] Thank for the comments. And that concludes our public comment
section. [Applause] So, I'll give everybody a minute to leave it. [Music] [Applause] [Music]
[Applause] [Music] [Applause] We got power. >> We got the power. >> We got the power. >> We got the power. >> We got the power.
>> We got the power. [Applause] Well, as people file out, our next agenda item is item seven, the board calendar and district update. And soon as he is ready, I will hand it over to Superintendent McIntyre.
>> All right. Thank you, board members. I think I can go. So, um, tonight I want to, uh, take a opportunity to celebrate students and staff and comm community members who are contributing to the accomplishment of our mission, which is to effectively educate each of our
students for success. And to start us off, uh, you can see on the screen here is a photo from the Anoka Anti-Rime Commission and their annual meeting this past Tuesday, October 21st. This is a community-based partnership. Many of you been uh to this event before. It really makes a positive
impact for safety in our community. The school district benefits from this strong partnership in the area of law enforcement. And I do want to point out um high school principal at Anoka High School Mike Farley and Anoka Middle School for the Arts principal Tom Hagerty both serve on the board of
directors and I think it's about 21 years for uh principal Farley somewhere in that neighborhood. Um, so they are uh very deeply engaged in the Anoka Anti-Rime Commission and their efforts and again in this photo here you can see them with uh Police Chief Andy Youngquist and
former Anoka City Council member and anti-rime commission chairperson Brian Wesp. So thank you for their service and another great event. All right, moving on. Marching bands from Anoka Henipin's five traditional high schools collected very high honors
at the youth and music Minnesota state championships and class championships at US Bank Stadium on Saturday, October 11th. Rapids High School earned first place in class A state and in addition to that there they got
outstanding color guard and outstanding visual awards. Anoka High School earned third place in the class A state championship with Sophia Tutor from Anoka High School earning the best drum major award. Very proud of her for that. Andover High School earned outstanding
percussion and outstanding wins awards. Blaine High School placed seventh in the preliminary competition in class doubleA and Champlain Park took sixth place in the preliminaries. So congratulations to the musicians and their support network. It does take many
to uh um and you if you could just see the growth from the summer till this point in the year, it's very amazing um as we uh saw that through the fall at many of the uh um performances at our football games. So, our efforts to continue to uh maintain and attract um
strong tradition music educators as you heard earlier uh and continue to be recognized for our efforts is uh really a great honor. Okay, so the Sang would be curtains are going up and they are on the fall theater
favorites across the In Noa Henipin schools. Andover High School is presenting The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime. Anoka High School presents Sirino. Blaine High School Theater is completing their fall season in October. Here
Rapids High School presents Clue and Champlan Park High Schools presenting a year with Frog and Toad. And we want to also mention Anoka Middle School for the Arts presenting of the Little Prince. So again, um ticketing information, dates and times and all the details are listed on websites on our school websites as
well as our district website. So we're at that time of the year when section and state tournament competition continues over the next several weeks as we conclude the fall season. Want to call out that Blaine High School boys soccer won their section and advanced to
state, bowing out in the quarterfinal round with the loss to Weisetta. In girls tennis, a pair of doubles teams advanced to state. Congratulations to Andover's Hannah Kle and Cameron Telbot and Blaine's Rosie Reki and Paige Dolman for representing the district at the
state tournament. The 6A state football playoff started last Friday and Champlin Park drew the number two seed in their bracket and advance with the win over Roseville. The Rebels will host number three seed Eden Prairie in the next round of the playoffs. Um the Rebels were the only district team to advance in football, but I know it was a great
season for all throughout the season. The Blaine Bengals boys cross country team is advancing to state along with four individual runners. David Meeberg, Israel Sugalan, and Olrich Burroughs along with Austin
Matrius. Get that right. Austin Matrius. And overs Tyler Flippen was a medalist at the section meet and will also advance along with Champlain Parks Zachariah Muhammad and Blake Frasier. In the girls competition, Blaine Freshman Brinley Wagner finished as a medalist at
the sections and will advance the state along with teammate Audrey Schwen and Rapids junior Rudy Demer. So tournament fever is here in in October and November and we just want to wish the best of luck to our student athletes in these state competitions and I know for some fall sports those
tryyouts are already beginning. All right, moving on to um our employee recruitment website launch. So the school board's placed a strategic priority on recruitment and retention and now the district has upped its game with a newly designed jobs. US website.
The new site provides greatly expanded information for prospective employees as a one-stop shop of resources about available positions, benefits, and the communities we serve. The job site is part of a larger website redesign, and that upgrade is set for launch in
December. By the way, this work is being done with the existing budgets and it is a mandatory requirement as our vendor um is really requiring these upgrades to make sure our technology can support those systems. All right, moving on to the national
civics be. So informed and active citizens make for a stronger community in a new competition seeks to engage civic-minded students to share their knowledge and ideas to shape our future. So applications for the National Civics B are now being accepted. This is a new
event in Minnesota and our local North Metro Chamber of Commerce is taking a lead role in promoting this fun academic competition. To apply, students complete a four paragraph essay identifying an opportunity, problem, or challenge in their school, neighborhood, or community
that could be improved and describe an action plan and support resources to address that issue. Solutions may demonstrate a link to the responsibilities of citizenship. The application window remains open through February 3rd, 2026 with additional
details at national civicsb.org. Local and state civic bees are also being planned as part of the activity and North Anoka Henipin is looking to partner with the North Metro Chamber of Commerce to serve as a host site. I know
this was also shared at the uh Blaine um um chamber meeting that we had just this past week. All right. So, and lastly here, our election day is set for Tuesday, November 4th. So voters will select new uh schoolboard members in election
districts 3, four, and six. School will be in session. And as a reminder, Jackson Middle School is the only site in the district used or only school in the district being used for this election. And the polling location will be at uh door 10, the pool entrance
area, which is secure and separated from any contact with students or staff. Polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. And there's also early voting, and all the details are on our district website. So, thanks to all for taking the time to be informed and to vote. So,
uh, co-chair, thank you. And that concludes my superintendent's report this evening. >> Thank you very much, board members. Are there any questions for the superintendent? All right. Well, thank you very much. Our next agenda item is elementary and secondary education item 8A, the October
1st enrollment report. Welcome Michelle Vargas, chief financial officer. Michelle Vandentop, director of technology and information systems, and Nick Herman, data integration manager. >> Good evening, Superintendent McIntyre and members of the board. We are here
tonight to present for you enrollment report, October one enrollment report. Um, the report can be found on appendix H. Uh Nick Herman, my colleague, is going to highlight several data points for you this evening. >> Thank you. Um so the purpose of our
October one report is we do it every year on October one so we can grab a snapshot of what our enrollments are um for that year. U we know our enrollments change daily. Kids come, kids go. October one is our snapshot of how our school is looking at this point in time.
Um the purpose of this to provide us information on enrollments, our key demographics, um any trends that are happening in our schools. Some schools are going up, going down, um flatlining, um and describe any potential impacts it may have on our district and things going on um in our schools.
Um so our October one enrollments, um they impact our our facilities and our programmings. Um we've had schools that have been um historically overpop populated. We've had schools that have decreased. Um we've had to repurpose. So our October ones really give us an idea
of the health um of each individual school. Is it overpop populated, underpop populated? Is it efficient? Um and this also um ties in with our projections. So each year in the winter u we go ahead and we project how many students we anticipate coming next year at every school, every grade level,
which helps us get our staffing um for the upcoming year. um and it affects our budget. Um and then other implications is, you know, are we using our facilities appropriately? Um our boundaries appropriate for our schools. Um and then also allows us to view
what's happening in terms of our open enrollment um enrollment options process and if there's any schools we want to monitor for that. All right. So an overall summary is our enrollment is fairly stable. Um we do have a slight decrease um in enrollments
um but we're talking very few like over 36,000 students we're talking 12 students decrease um our projections were within just under 1% um and it's pretty typical for each year within 1 to 2% um accurate with our projections. Um
we notice some changes or trends, excuse me, with ethnicity. Um it is very um a stable trend where our schools are becoming more and more diverse and our district is becoming more diverse. Um there are some steady trends with our multilingual learners. Um and also our
free and reduced populations are slightly decreasing. Um so K12 our enrollments had decreased by 12 students. >> Just a second please. Director Langenfeld just got a question. I just have a question about free and reduced populations continuing with a
slight decrease. Um I it appears to align when we started having free meals for kids and is that possible that people just aren't signing up may have qualified. >> Yep, it is. So, can you just share the
district's efforts to make sure so that I understand what the district is doing because that that's a trend in places. So, I just want to know if it's really declining or people just aren't signing up. >> Director Langfeld, the efforts are still
the same. So, the child nutrition program is reaching out um to all families in order to um express the need for them to fill it out if they um want to um access other items that are um reductions that they can access for free
and reduced um activity fees, those types of things. So, there still is a very hard push within our child nutrition department um in connection with our our student information system to get out to families the benefits that are available to them and accessible if
they fill it out where they may not directly qualify without filling out the paperwork. >> Thank you. I appreciate that because I think it's very important um for the district to have that information to offer those supports for the families. The other part in wonderment um is
sometimes there's federal funding tied to the percentage of children that receive free and reduced lunch. So are we are we impacted by that? >> There's federal funding um based on the meals served for those that would
qualify. So yes, um if there are students being served with the free lunch from the state at this point in time that didn't apply for it but would have qualified, yes, we are um it's being backfilled by the state. >> Okay. >> So it's not a loss to the district per
se, but it is it's an exchange of costs from federal dollars to state dollars. Um the way that the reimbursement goes for meals now with all paid meals. >> Okay. Thank you for that. board members. I'd just like to point out in a couple slides you'll see the breakdown in the trend going back to
2016 where we did see a a double digit jump in from 21 to 22, but pre- pandemic um we're still well above that. It was a 2% decrease from about 42% to about 40%. So, as we wait for the state work on the comp the comped calculation and formula,
that'll that'll help us reset what's our strategy, right? how that gets done. We'll we'll we'll adjust our efforts around that. Thank you. >> Um so as had mentioned our enrollments are down slightly 12 students overall.
Um we had projected for a 366 student decrease um for this year and we did operate under a very conservative um projections um as to avoid overstaffing um and then and just because our projections and our staffing are related
and tied together. Um yeah, go to the next slide. And this is just our overall trend as a district. Um K12 traditional schools um of what we've what we've had since 1993. Um and a notable trend and I'll mention
this a few times throughout is we were doing having increases 2016, 17, 18, 19 and 2020 hit the pandemic. Um and that decreased our population significantly. Um and we were on a trend up um but we
have not yet recovered um from our losses um for the pandemic. So our K5 or elementary schools they have decreased uh by 232 students from last year. Uh and the previous year it had decreased from 224 students. Um so
we are seeing a decline in our overall elementary enrollment. Um, and we also have a small kindergarten class of 2,268. That is historically our smallest kindergarten class. Um, I went back 30
some years and that is still our smallest um class. And what we are seeing for kindergarten is it used to fluctuate um 50 to 80 students around 2600 give or take. Um we are seeing that this is the third year in a row where
we've seen a steady decline. Um typically we'd see it go up and go down a little bit. Um but this is number three where it is a straight decline with our kindergarten students. Um and this chart here shows that right there. >> Superintendent had some thoughts. >> Thank you. I just wanted to point out
we've talked about this before board members but we are seeing a 50-year low in birth rates as well. So couple that with families having smaller families and waiting longer from what we heard from the state demographer. I think that trend with small enroll small classes at kindergarten is likely a trend that can
continue on for us and across the state. >> Yeah. And we've seen decreases before like 2007 to 2012. We saw a decrease and then it popped up a little bit. From 2016 to 2018, we saw a decrease and it
popped up a little bit. Um it may pop up a little bit again in the next couple years. Um but I don't expect just like we've seen with thermographers and stuff that our younger population kindergarten um overall will not likely
increase um overall. So here is our I think we said our K enrollments. Next slide please. our middle school um enrollments are up 248 students. Um and right now I did some of
our math. Um these sixth graders were our kindergarten COVID students um that are hitting our middle schools right now. Um so we did see a larger increase in our middle school and we typically see an increase from fifth grade to sixth grade in your transitions um years
and also from 8th grade to 9th grade. Um we saw a pretty big increase this year from sixth grade um or fifth grade to sixth grade, excuse me. Um so part of the speculation is we may have gained some of those kids who left during CO who didn't start with us and maybe went to private or somewhere. Um but it is a
noticeable increase that we got from fifth grade to sixth year is a from fifth to sixth grade that is a bit larger this year. Um in our high school enrollments they are down a bit uh down 28 students. Um and in
Last year we were down 212 students in high school. We have seen another decrease um but just not at the same rate. Um and here's our middle school enrollments. Um it fluctuates. We are seeing a slight increase. Um
but again with our kindergartens being lower, you know, we're seeing higher cohorts come through. Um, so we may see decreases, we'll likely see decreases in the future as our kindergarten population metriculates through. Um, and here we have our high school.
Um, so last few years we've been very very steady with our high school population overall. So this slide here is our ethnic groups um our ethnic populations within our schools and we have seen a steady increase. Um this is a part of the data
that I like. It's easy um it's easy to predict. Um we are seeing steady increases year after year in our ethnic population. So in this graph here is our multilingual or the chart. Um the most important what I'll draw your attention to is the fourth column in the
percentages. Uh we are seeing a steady increase. We do have a jump in 2425 which is last year to 10% back down to 9 and a half% this year but overall trend is increasing in our multilingual students. Um so here's some additional
information. are free and reduced. Um we have decreased by 2.15%. Um and Michelle Vargas had gone through our efforts to kind of what's going on and what our departments are doing to um to kind of recoup some of that and make sure our families are applying for all
the services that they qualify for. Um then the direct certifi certification um has impacted us as well and those numbers. >> Yeah. Uh you spoke to that direct certification. So that's the cause of the jump.
>> Is that what what what jumped it so high so quick? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. In 2022. Yes. There that was the first year that they um implemented the direct certification of the Medicaid. >> Yeah. So could you just for all of us
just tell us what that change did like when they direct the direct certification? What did it what did it mean? what >> um for us it was just how we were certifying prior to that it was all based on the paper. >> Yeah. >> From that. So once you put that in more of it um those that weren't filling out
the paperwork weren't getting credit for it. So as a district we weren't getting credit for it. So what happened was compensatory jury funding is directly related to this. So that year that happened statewide. So what it did is it basically doubled the amount at the
state level that compensatory was. This was actually that large jump what it did for us was the what we were to maintain a lot of the esser positions that we talk about because it increased our compensatory. So it just the number of students that weren't being identified because families weren't filling out the
paperwork. >> Yeah. So the issue now is they might not fill out the paperwork. >> They otherwise qualify based upon this. Right. So how does that >> it's it's the right now it's the the families that don't directly qualify through um the direct certification. you
still the the new formula the back and forth and compensatory is just using the direct qualified and now there's a hold harmless. So we're still looking for those families to fill it out. >> Yeah. >> Because right now it does affect um and
we saw what we would have had for the current year would have dropped $4 million the new formula with not including the paper ones. So, even if we're not getting all the paper ones, the paper ones that we were getting um and not considering those dropped our revenue $4 million, but they came in
with the hold harmless from that. So, that's the formula that they're looking at with it. >> Okay. Thanks. And overall, um, just kind of summarize what we've covered today is our enrollments, they're stable, um, but they're not likely to grow significantly. Um, our kindergartener is
coming low and they're our base number uh, when they come in. We typically grow from kindergarten to first, first to second as they move up through 12th grade. Those cohorts add on, um, but our base number is getting lower. Um, so would, you know, expect our overall enrollments to slowly decline. um as far
as we can see for now. Um which you know we have here the birth rates impact that yeah >> sorry uh okay I inter I didn't necessarily mean to interrupt you but um so there's there's discussion of like a really huge development in inover
>> are we starting to factor that into calculations yet? I know it's pretty early. It's not really 100% approved but it's big. >> Yeah, we've met with the city. We're actually meeting again with the cities um this week um I believe it's about
1,400 homes um so and we've seen this a lot um especially within and over um the villas going in um and those we don't see kids from villas um apartments and stuff we don't necessarily especially high apartments we don't see kids >> um
>> so yes we are looking at we're very aware of that I believe their anticipated completion date is 2035 >> um they're doing rough roughly anticipate 100 and someish homes a year. Um so yes, we are very aware of that and we are watching that um for Andover schools.
>> That's good. Thanks. >> Yeah, and with that I like you bringing that up because housing does bring kids. Um and one of the biggest things that we noticed with housing um around the pandemic which really caught us off guard was low interest rates. if we see
low interest rates, younger families can afford homes. Um the newer homes are being built. Um so that does imp impact our schools. Um but it's really who moves in and who can afford those homes, whether it's new families, young families or older families in existing. Um but that is something we watch very
closely is all the developments going on in our district. Um and again, we gather birth rates every year. Uh all the students or children that are born in our district, they come into our system. Um and then we don't have a lot of touch points but then we bring them into um
the year when they come into kindergarten do some calling and stuff and those are all you know declining slightly. Um and you know last bullet point here is we are just expecting a very slight um decline nothing major but slight decline.
So if that wraps up our presentation are there any questions for us? Uh board members, any additional questions or comments? All right. Well, thank you very much for the presentation. >> Thank you. >> All right. Our next agenda item is item
8B, the comprehensive achievement and civic readiness achievement integration overview. Welcome Tanya Constantine, deputy superintendent. Sarah Hunter, executive director of learning and achievement, and Scott Hair, executive director of student support services. [Applause]
Good evening everyone. My name is Tanya Constantine. Um, welcome to our presentation members of the board and Superintendent McIntyre. So tonight we have the great privilege of sharing our district's year
in year in review. This is the old world's best workforce. Um this year it is called it's been renamed by MDE the comprehensive achievement and civic readiness which we now call CACER. Uh we also have some data in here from our
achievement and integration plan. Um you're going to see a lot of data in the next um half hour. uh we want to thank Dr. Janna Romer Hurt and her RE team for compiling the data and creating such informative visuals.
Now the presentation of the world's best workforce or CACER um I I have some history with this as it's something that every um school board listens to about this time of year and it always seems
like it kind of hits the same where people start to check out a little bit. It's lagging indicators. It's data that um we required from last year's test scores. And I think though what really um what can be challenging for
educators, teachers, and principles and all of us sitting here is the timing of it. Um it kind of reminds me of a football season. So you think when you're all excited about a new football season, right? You're all hyped up. You go to the first opening game, you've got
your face painted, you're all hyped up, and then imagine if after the first quarter, the GM comes out and says, "Hey, uh, we're going to talk about last season's data. We're going to go over the sacks, the fumbles, false starts,
um, turnovers." That's kind of how teachers, principals, educators feel right now. We have a really positive start to the beginning of the school year. um we're feeling very future focused and we'd like to um keep this positive the leading indicators how we
are responding to this data um at the forefront. So when you re uh review the data tonight you're going to see some encouraging trends as well as areas where continued attention is needed. We
recognize that and both are important. Our team can say with confidence that we will see an increase in literacy scores over the next several months and years.
We are confident in giving you that information and there are several reasons why. First of all, our teacher training. Our teachers have gone through the most rigorous literacy training across the nation.
Uh they have received purposeful training in phenemic awareness, phonics, morphology, vocabulary, reading fluency and comprehension. When I was an elementary classroom teacher 10 years ago, we were
not being trained to this high level. We also have a very incredible new reading curriculum, CKLA, with proven results. Um, we actually had adopted this CKLA three years ago down in southeast
Minnesota. We saw immediate results and the the literacy scores continue to climb. Finally, we can say with confidence that our literacy scores will improve because of enhancing our multi-tered systems of support.
Um allow me because I have the microphone to make a pitch for the importance of highly skilled instructional and academic coaches and interventionists. Our teachers have um been trained in
intensive um curriculum adoption and a lot of literacy information that they possibly were not taught in college. We have highly trained teachers who have become coaches, interventionists,
um, and specialists. They work with our teachers during the teachers prep time for job embedded professional development. I have been moving around the schools in this district. I have been in five districts and what I have seen has
completely blown my mind. Every time I come back from a school, whether it's elementary, middle school, or high school, and they don't know I'm coming, I can tell you about the growth and literacy that I'm seeing. I am seeing teachers who are taking their own prep
time to go work with interventionists to learn how to provide better strategies in the classroom. Finally, even MVE MVP quarterbacks have their own quarterback coaches. When Josh
Allen of the Buffalo Bills won MVP last year, he credited most of his success to his quarterback coach. Enough of the football analogies. I want to introduce our executive director of learning and achievement, Sarah Hunter, and executive director of student
services, Scott Hair. Good evening uh co-chairs Arco and Duchaine, Superintendent McIntyre, um members of the board and the public um here and online. I'll be sharing um as um Deputy Superintendent um Constantine
um described the um both sort of the overview of our response to um KCER legislation, but also the data um that that is aligned with it from last year. and then my colleague will be sharing about the achievement integration plan. Um, and I will say that the most
important thing that I'll be sharing this evening is our next steps as a district um to respond to both celebrate and respond to our data from last year. So um the uh ker has six uh components and so no henipin has a strategy um
implemented to support each of those six. So um we have goals um that you all set from the board level all the way down to the classroom level, right? So um those are integrated into school improvement plans um discussed in leadership teams at each site. Um we also have a comprehensive assessment
system. You'll see um a lot of that data today um though I would say the most important data um that we use as a part of our assessment system is the day-to-day assessments that teachers are using in their classrooms to inform instructional decisions. Um all of our staff are regularly scheduled for
performance reviews and um you're familiar with the program with QC comp. So QC comp supports our teacher um development and evaluation. Um those observations focus on instruction. Um and then um my team is responsible for making sure that our curriculum um are
aligned to the standards and to our students needs. We also employ a lot of different um effective educational practices. One of the most important um is MTSS and I'll speak more about that throughout the slides later this evening. And I think this is important to mention that over 75% of our district
budget is um directly aligned to classrooms. Um that feels important to me given that um the learning happens in classrooms. >> I'm going to hand it to executive director here. >> Thank you. I appreciate being here for my first presentation to the school
board. So thank you. If you look at the achievement and integration um plan, we've been involved in this for for for many years, but it results out of uh out of legislative components. And so there's three areas about the legislative components. One is reducing the the disparities in academic
achievement based on a student's diverse racial, ethnic, and economic backgrounds. Another one is to reduce the disparities in equitable access to effective and more diverse teachers among racially, ethnically, and economically diverse students. And lastly, to increase racial and economic
diversity and integration. Now, how does this come about? So, there's there's buckets. If you could turn to the next slide, please. There's six buckets that our plan Yes. >> Can I ask a question real quick? I mean, I probably know the answer, but just for the sake of putting the thought out there, are we doing anything to prevent
that from occurring? Like all of those the goals of on the last slide, like the two or three bullets. >> I'm not quite sure I understand your question. So, uh, what was the can we go back to that last slide?
So, for example, it says like increase racial and economic diversity and integration. Are are we doing anything to prevent that from occurring? >> Well, the plan is so there's four ways we qualify. So, get if you I don't know if you've been through that, but so you can be a ra a racially isolated um
school district. And so to prevent that would have to mean that you'd have to prevent yourself from being a racially not a racially identified school district um or isolated school district. Um we could be adjoining a racially isolated school district. So you'd have
to move away from being a racially um or joining a racially isolated school district. Um you can voluntary to be to be in this plan. Um, so there's different ways that, but because of the eligibility, you'd have to meet not meet one of those eligibility areas to to
move away from that. >> So, Director Wagenfeld of um through magnet schools and specialty schools that that was the strategy back in the day when we had some of the schools identified. So that's how some of them came to be.
>> That's my understanding too, Director Langel. >> Well, board members, the statute cited at the bottom of the slide. So, um there's there's allowable um ways to address the the statute requirements. Um that is one of the >> one of the methods that this
>> and maybe heard your question didn't understand it. So if you look at the buckets on the next slide and what you just represented um these buckets try to work through all of these areas within that statute. So if you look at the college and and career readiness the
rigorous coursework such as AVID since our and like our IB program that's one way to try to do that professional development within our our teaching staff um targeted interventions to try to improve achievement. And so you look at some of our middle school and high
school reading and math interventionists that are a part of that program. Uh the family engagement. So we have student support advocates, culture liaison. Um our student services group has many family engagement nights. Um we just had one recently at the w at
our enrollment center. Um we we have an integrated and innovative learning environment. So this is what um director lagenf was just uh mentioning our magnet schools. uh we belong to the Northwest Integration School District Collaborative. And then lastly, it's the the recruitment and retention of a
diverse workforce um to try to improve that as well. >> So So I guess if I could maybe pinpoint one of them on that slide, it says reduce disparities and equitable access to effective and more diverse teachers among racially, ethnically, and economically diverse students. So
it's I guess it's a two-part question. Are we doing anything to prevent diverse teachers from getting these jobs? I don't think we are. But then if we're not, I guess maybe what's implied is we're trying to almost force it to
occur or or favoring certain ethnic groups over others to meet that. Is that a correct understanding? I think one of the benefits of this plan and one of the goals of this plan is to get a more diverse workforce that better
um is more aligned with some of our student population. So, if you just looked at the previous um presentation, you had a a an increase in in our student groups of of ethnic area ethnic areas. So, what this plan does and what the state plan tried to to do was to try
to match that to some degree. That doesn't mean we're changing our hiring practices around that that I'm aware of. >> I I guess what I'm getting at is to meet this, we have to look at the color of their skin when we're hiring them, right? To check that box to say if we
want a diverse hire or whatever, diverse teachers, what does that even mean? Like if we're not first observing the color of their skin and then making decisions based upon that. Is that correct? Well, I've only been here for four months, so I'd have to go back and review our hiring processes, but I don't believe
that to be the case. >> How else then could we even assess if we're getting diverse teachers among racially, ethnically, and economically diverse students if we don't ask that question? >> As a school district, one of the goals would be to in terms of meeting this plan would be to increase your teachers
of color. >> Does that mean that we're we're changing our hiring practices and taking different teachers over different teachers because of the color of the skin? is I think that's the question you're asking me. No. >> Okay. So, for not doing that then >> I would say we're we are out encouraging
and and in and recruiting stu uh teachers of color. That doesn't mean though that we're taking um if you're just saying the color of the skin gets their job. No, >> that's not what I'm saying. But but if one of the criteria before we're recruiting is let's check what the color
of their skin is and then go recruit. That is occurring. Sounds like right. I don't agree with I don't I don't believe the way you're rephrasing it is exactly the way that that is happening. >> Well, then I go back to my original question. How can we even establish then if we're hiring diverse teachers if we don't ask that question?
>> Well, in terms of our HR department, they keep data on all of our um employment records in terms of what our diversity is within our workforce in all different areas. That could be pair professionals, custodians. Um and so the goal would be in terms of this plan
would be to increase those areas. So, we verify it after the fact, but during the hiring process, we pay no mind to it. Is that correct? >> So, in terms of an application, you're asking, do they check if they're a teacher of color and then therefore they get moved?
>> Not not how they apply, how we assess. So, we verify after the fact. That's I believe what you were just describing. But during the hiring process, if we're seeking more diverse teachers, how can we know if we're getting them if we don't ask that question? Like we the district
I'd have to get back to you on that question because I I'm not familiar with exactly our hiring process in terms of that question. >> Well, I guess I would add that statewide 4% of our teachers are teachers of
color. So, I think most districts would love to have a workforce that represents the students we serve. And we have vacancies and uh hard to fill positions, right? So, we are always looking for the best candidate and we also want to hire staff
that um reflect the populations in and the communities that we represent. You just saw the slide. We double in our ethnic uh makeup as a district almost every 10 years. So, it's a little bit of a both end. We we don't that would be discriminatory if we selected a
candidate purely on their skin color, right? That's not what happens. We also have an obligation to um put put as many great employees in front of our kids every day and um we know that there's an effect there. So this plan though is
really meant on student outcomes so we can follow with more human resources information if the board would like. Uh we're happy to do that. We've done that. This is one of your recruitment and retention is one of the board priorities and um there's many strategies that we've covered over over time that we use
to to get there. This this plan that we're talking about tonight is about how do we increase achievement and academic outcomes for students. >> Correct. And we'll be coming back with uh a new plan here in a couple of months. We're in the process of rewriting that plan and taking stakeholder information on that plan. So
we'll be presenting here probably in January or February because it has to be submitted to the state in March. >> All right. Um this next slide and I think it's it's me aside from Scott for one slide for the rest of the presentation. Um go back one slide.
Sorry. So what you'll see here um relates to some of the conversation um from earlier this evening. Uh the blue line is over the last 10 years. Um the increase in students of color that Anoka Henipin is serving over time. So you'll see a steady increase over the last
decade. Um the two lines near the bottom, the yellow and the green are our students receiving special education services and students receiving multilingual services. So those student populations have grown as well um but have grown at a slightly slower rate. Um
and then you'll also see you see the the sort of weird jump in the line the red line that is the students who qualify for free and reduced lunch. Um and as was discussed earlier um when the state instituted the um direct certification requirement. We're seeing that decline
over these last two years. And the odd jump is because there were two years um and you'll see the asterisk on the bottom 20 uh the 2021 school year and 2122 school year. It was not required um to submit applications. So we had that um dip and then jump up there. Um what I
would ask is that you consider um the um our demographic trends and the students who we have the privilege of serving as I present the rest of the data as these are the students who are represented in our data. Just a quick comment. I want to follow up on a question I was asked earlier
with uh director Odette. Uh it's a really good one. And we have one year of hold harmless on the current comped formula. That's a that's a $4 million piece for our district. And then we also have a $5 million component that's goes with that for a pilot that was put in
place nearly 20 years ago. So there's a lot writing on this next year on how that formula um gets decided with the main piece of that formula being around the concentration factor of uh poverty. So in smaller schools if there's a higher concentration that's what's been
used in the past and we have large buildings in our district is for efficiency. So we are definitely um trying to provide input to that committee to make sure that we um don't see a big influence or a big a big u change that would hurt us
financially in that reestablishment of that formula because we have a lot of money you know really at play here on that particular piece that we've used over time for many things. So just want to reinforce that. >> All right. So these next three slides
are um about student perception data. So the first you'll see across all grade bands we saw an increase in the percent of students who report they feel safe at school um from at every grade level between 24 and 25. Um our data also
shows that staff's um feeling of safety in school jumped up from 24 to 25. Um though the data presented on this slide is just for students. The next slide um speaks to safety and connectedness in the area of bullying.
So again, this is on our annual survey um at the um and and then here we want to see um that students have never been bullied, right? So this is the percent of students who report they've never been bullied um went up for our high school students and it's at the highest at the high school level. So you see an
increase from 89 to 92% um whereas we saw um statistically not very significant declines in elementary and middle year. And then the third um we saw an increase across all grade levels from um school
year 24 to 25 um for sorry um I am on the wrong slide on my own thing. So, um, an increase across all grade levels between 24 and 25 for students relationship with teachers. And given that, um, the only way that we're going to see strong instruction impact student achievement is if they, uh, students
feel safe and secure, um, with their teacher student teacher relationship, this is a really positive, um, statistic to see. >> And I'm going to hand it to executive director here. So, in terms of of the district's response to that data and some of the other um concerns around
safety and connectiveness, I want to highlight a few areas to to bring to your attention. So, again, we are reviewing the safety task force recommendations and we do meet often on that and and put some things into place in regards to all of the the areas that
that task force came forward with. One of them is routinely monitoring student discipline at the systems level. So, we have a group that comes together every two weeks. We're looking across the district. We're looking at hotspots. We're looking at behavior um and we're
tracking that and we're working with those buildings and maybe sending some additional support when needed. Um and and um trying to support that behavior. Um we're also trying to uh work with continuing the support for chemical and mental health because that can be a big
trigger for behavior. and working with our chemical health specialists. They they're working with a new program called the REACH program and trying to connect students and families with services and get interventions for for chemical health. Um providing that ongoing professional development on
engagement and behavior. We've had several um PD I think um deputy superintendent talked about the literacy training that we've gone gone on. We've also got a lot of different other types of PD that have gone on in this area. And then also um delivering
individualized interventions through counseling, special education, and targeted behavior plans. Talked about the MTSS model, our multiple our multiple multiple tiered support um levels of service and what that looks like. So we're really trying to increase what those interventions look like to
provide those supports. And then we're always trying to strengthen family and community partnerships to support consistent um behavior expectations. And but again, going back to that safety task force, we really have taken every one of those bulleted items with total
seriousness and put teams in place that are are working towards those. >> All right, it's back to me. Um so the um next series of several slides uh will be performance data um that are aligned to the comprehensive achievement
and civic readiness goals. So there are goals in um if you go to the next slide, there are goals in school readiness. Um so making sure that our students who um arrive to kindergarten who we have served in pre-k programming or early childhood programming come to
kindergarten um as uh prepared as is possible. um that our students leave us college and career ready, that we continue to reduce and then close achievement gaps, and that all of our students graduate. Um formerly, third grade literacy or readwell by third
grade was a part of um this presentation that is now um looped into the read act, but I will speak to literacy throughout this presentation. Um so the next two slides are about school readiness. The first is um the teaching strategies
goal data. that is what we use in our pre-K programming. Um and one note that um compares this slide to the next slide, the this um data is gathered over the course of the year that we serve students in pre-K programming and the bar does not change from fall to winter
to spring. It's the same u where right same expectations. What we want to see is an increase um and we do see that we increased across all developmental areas um comparing school year 24 to 25. The next slide um is essentially our u metric for and now when those students
move into kindergarten and they are in kindergarten classes with students who um may not have had the opportunity to be a part of our prek programming. How is our whole kindergarten class doing? Um at the beginning of the year we see our students are coming in at about 27% of them are um meeting grade level
standards for that time of year. So that's what makes this assessment different. And then when you move to the spring, the bar has has raised, right? So we expect more out of our students as they have been with us over the course of a year. Um so it's a it's a um big positive improvement that we see um more
than double of our students um who came in proficient are then uh proficient in the spring. That means um some of the things that we are doing in our classrooms as it relates to reading in K kindergarten are working and we just need to continue to improve to see more than 67% of our students ready. then
this would be for first grade at the end of kindergarten. So in terms of what are we doing about it, so this is the part that um I am almost at the fourmonth point. Um so I'm going to be sharing what we are intending to do over the course of this year and some of the things we've
already begun. Um so in early childhood, as you know, um this district was well ahead of your peers in getting teachers um registered and excited about letters training. Um so we continue to make sure that all of our teachers are trained in
um foundational skills and science of reading. Um and we chose early um we chose letters for early learners which is the right full package um to support our um early childhood teachers so that then when our students come into kindergarten um they are as prepared as
we can be. Um we are also using Heggerty as our um supplemental curriculum in preK in order to support um foundational skills for students as they are um moving towards kindergarten. And that aligns really well with our um K5 curricula that we have just adopted this year. Um and then as you hear over the
course of the evening um the use of a strong MTSS model is really important for all all of the needs that a child has um and at the pre-k level particularly supporting um school readiness school right the ability to be with peers um on the carpet etc um and
in play. So we do support um social emotional learning um through an MTSS model in prek. I'm going to move to elementary. So we have um three MCA slides. So the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessment um just to orient you to the slides for the
rest of the the presentation on MCA. The blue line when present is the state average and then the bars are Anoka Henipin scores. So you'll see here um our uh scores increased in grade five from 24 to 25 and had small decreases in
grades three and four. that meant that we were um stable across the system um but are well above the state average in math. And then in literacy um we saw an increase in grade five. So you see a sort of cohort effect there, right? Where that group of fifth graders,
they're up in both um literacy and in math. Um and again, same deal where third and fourth grade are a small decline. Um so there's sort of something about that that we need to make sure we're supporting those grade levels appropriately. Um but again above the um
the state average in reading. And then here I want to be really clear about the the black line. Um so we started u the state of Minnesota um implemented a brand new MCA science test last year. So this is the first slide that speaks to that. This is fifth grade
um but fifth 8th and then we take one um one year in high school as well. Um the state has asked that we not compare it's inappropriate to compare this year's results or 2025's results to the prior years. It's a different test on different standards. Um so this is considered our baseline for the
district. In fifth grade um we are 5% higher than the state average which is considered our new baseline. So what we will be looking to see as we move towards um MCA season this next year um is an increase in that 32% uh baseline.
Yes, >> Director >> Langel. >> At some point, it would be really nice to get a little more detail. I I'm interested in knowing what the how it's being scored and what the cut scores are. And it's I think that's really
important if it aligns with NAPE testing that often, you know, what's it normed with and and what, >> you know, are we looking normed with with national? >> Sure. >> I' I'd like to handle that. Thanks, >> director. >> Thank you. Can you give us just a minute
or two for those listening about some of the differences like what was the MCA test before? What is it testing now? How how is it different? >> So, the biggest change from um the last round of standards to this new round of standards is that um the assumption is
that students that um anything that is wrote memorization is is no longer tested. Right? So um if you think of the depth of knowledge levels um from 1 to four, there are no depth of knowledge one questions on the MCA science at all anymore at any of the three grade
levels. Um and then very few very like minimal um level two depth of knowledge. The assumption is that students in their science classrooms are learning um how to make meaning of the data in front of them and then um essentially like explain their thinking around the trends
they're seeing. Um so I think one of the most important things to us as a yeah and then yes and making inferences so um they are presented more with scenarios that they then have to um assess and analyze. So it's a higher level of thinking that's required um and it's not
um it's not necessarily going to be data they're familiar with. Right? So it assumes both math and science skills are present for students at these three grade levels. Um, so as we see, you know, we we want to see our math scores go up. They they should then correlate with increases in science scores
>> and of course literacy. So I think the all three are sort of in tandem with one another. Um, we're going to see a change in our literacy and our math tests coming up too. So this is sort of the first right of our opportunity to have
this conversation. Um, our expectations for our students is that they um are sense makers, right? and that's what these standards require of them. Um so I think one of the most important things is that we have um opportunities for
them in each of their science classes to um engage in laboratory experiments that allow them to make meaning and then check right check their understanding amongst their peers. >> Um yeah predictions and assessments. So um it it looks wildly different um from
what we have had in the past which might have been that you could memorize a bunch of things about you know science and then um present it um in multiple choice questions on the MCA and that's that is a thing of the past for for our for our state. >> Director Hulkman.
>> Thank you. Yeah. So I think we're um the trend great um big changes happening in science here and certainly that difference um between wrote memorization and inquirybased learning. Uh, one thing that I find um
concerning is that while this is a rewriten test that's testing those different strategies, I think that um our school district worked hard to implement changes in elementary school and middle school years prior to this test. So, um it seems like that that
planning ahead um I in fact I'm I am a science teacher and I was working in the district when those changes were adopted. So I believe that was four years ago, 5 years ago that those new things were put in place. So um when we were looking at that downward
trend in the years prior, it was explained as well we're teaching students with a different method. So it makes sense that we went from 57 to 54 to 50. Now we have the new test and I understand there has to be some
normalization but that is a strikingly low number. Um so that brings concern. We'll definitely have to dig into that more. Also just a comment about the idea of um wrote memorization and certainly it's at um as you pointed out the bottom
of the pyramid. >> Um we also want to think about the bottom of the pyramid is the base of the pyramid. you need that foundational knowledge in order to perform at the high levels. So, um just making certain especially for our English language
learners who aren't familiar with the terms at all, which is not unique to them, but I think to all students without the vocabulary, it's going to be very hard to implement the principles of science. So, um, just something for us to look forward to to make certain that
we're giving students the opportunity to grow and flourish in their science. >> Yeah, I just want to echo that sentiment. That's kind of baffling to me that they've discarded wrote memorization because I'm not aware of any subjects that there aren't there
isn't at least some portion of memorization necessary to do that subject, even including being a doctor. I'm sure you want your doctor to have completely memorized the functions of all the major body parts. It would be pretty astonishing if they had to think that through every time they saw a liver or something. So, it's kind of weird
that they do that in science. I guess that that makes no sense to me. >> I think I appreciate your comment in bringing that into the space. Director Hulkman, you are correct that it is layering on top, right? So, I um yes, it would be it would be super important that we make sure that students
understand content, vocabulary, etc. in its and so I think a part of what the um test specs would assume um is you are correct director arco that students have that knowledge and then can apply it right so it's a yes and um I also think
one note to make is that when um when we think about instructional minutes um we don't have a lot of time dedicated to elementary science so I think as somebody who cares deeply about students um having being able to engage in all
content areas at the elementary level. There um there's not a lot of time um for teachers at the elementary level to cover science content. Um and we did um implement early um as a district um some of the the standards, but that started
at the middle school level. It wasn't as early at the other grades. Um, so I think a couple things that I would like to to be able to come back and talk with you about is um instructional minutes and how we make sure that students have access to content across all um all of the content areas at the elementary
level and then um making sure that we are ensuring that our instruction is at the level um or our materials and our instruction um are aligning with what students need as they take the assessment. >> So I really appreciate this conversation. So some of what you um we just discussed
was a part of what I wanted to talk about here. So thank you. Um one of the things that feels really important to acknowledge um for our elementary teachers is that they have a a huge task. They had a huge task before this year um because they are responsible for teaching a a lot of different content
areas over the course of a day. Um but now this year um we have the gift from you all from last year of um brand new literacy curricula in bridgeto read functional morphology and CQLA. Um that does mean that the lift for our elementary teachers is high. Um and one
of the things that we have um done differently with implementation of these three curricula is um as compared to um the wonders roll out um several years prior is we want to make sure that we are engaging with our teachers in planning backwards planning from the
standards um they are the people who know the most about what their students know and don't know and need in the classroom. Um so a lot of the work that our literacy specialists are doing this year is um directly supporting grade level teams at their schools in planning from the standards to match the
curricular resources that are in front of them. um instead of what had sort of happened in the pandemic and this was not unique to Anoka Henipin is a um teaching just the next thing, right? It it was a necessity when we were teaching from our homes. Um it it sort of became
a thing that you know it was like the next lesson in the slide deck. Um and what we know is that our teachers are brilliant and they have skills and experience in meeting students needs. Um so the the pairing of literacy specialist support and grade level team backwards planning um is a lot of what
we have done thus far this year for um CKLA specifically. Um we also are as I had mentioned earlier we're ahead of the game in letters training but we continue to make sure that any folks who are new to our system um get their um appropriate training and so we're doing
that both with letters training and with OLA so the online language and literacy academy that's a bit shorter. Um we are also in the seventh year of both um implementation of bridges and number corner at the elementary level for math and our talent development school within
a school programming. Um of course we have academic and behavior interventions to meet the individual needs of all students. But what I would say is always important first is that we are ensuring that every student has access to highquality tier one instruction. So that backwards planning that I'm describing that our literacy specialists
are doing, that has to come first and then only then we layer on those um interventions that students need on top of that. Um and then we also of course are implementing behavior plans in order to make sure that we can support our students in being um um engaged in their
classrooms all day long. >> So as we jump into middle school, >> superintendent, >> sorry, I'm just give a little breather here. Um and I should have I should have spoke up earlier. I just want to help uh the board members. I I we welcome uh and um share your sense of
urgency. >> And I also want to point out and I tried to point this out in my last update to the board and I'll go back to science. Despite um those slides and those scores looking different and and low compared to what we're used to seeing, we have schools at the high school, middle, and
elementary level that are in the top quartile in the state in science. So, we have areas that we are successful, highly successful that we just need to figure out how to make that work more across the system. It's true in math um as well as you're going to see and also
in reading. So, um we are excited because we know it's possible and when you look at our schools compared to schools like ours, we are in that top quartile. Um so there's there's um excitement and energy
around that because we we believe we can drive those how do we get those kind of results broader across the system right so I just want to pause and kind of insert that give s a little breather here >> thank you all right so these slides will look
relatively familiar um we saw an increase in middle school so across um sixth seventh and eighth grade both seventh and eighth grade those cohorts saw increases um a slight decrease increase in grade six of 1% um which isn't real s stat statistically significant um which resulted in an
overall increase um and you'll see again the blue lines uh we are above the state average across the board as we move to reading um again so this is similar to in elementary we have these same two grades increased in both math and and literacy right so grades seven and eight
have see an increase and a small decrease in grade six um resulting in an overall increase for our middle schools across across the board. And then here you'll see again, so um sort of same deal, the brand new assessment, we were at 20% proficient in
uh on MCA science in this first year and that is 3% higher than the district or sorry than the state average um for the first year of the new assessment. So when it comes to what are we going to do about it um at the middle school level, so I um for context, I'm a former
middle school teacher. Um, middle school math is where my heart is. Um, I only moved to elementary because I wanted my middle school students to have um, more of the skills that I wanted them to have at the middle school level. Um, so that um, this is a group of children who I understand well. Um, and our middle
school principles are um, brilliant individuals who deal with a lot of adolescent uh, stuff right on the day in and day out. Um so they of course need to work on strengthening our our academic programs but also um how students um feel as they are in the classrooms in the hallways etc. Right?
So it's the first place where students are needing to move around the building regularly throughout the day and that's a big jump. Um we are using OLA to support our teachers at the middle school and high school level um in order to make sure that the folks who are working on improving literacy
achievement have what they need in terms of the um skills and the materials. And then this feels like um one of the biggest changes and I would say um should give us a um a measurable improvement in how effective our reading
intervention classes are is the use of CAPY. It is um statutoily required. Um but this one I like I feel really excited about. Um we used CAPY in the district that I'm coming in a year ahead of the requirement and so it's an assessment that we will be giving
midyear. It's um six different subtests um that allow us much more tangible granular data about what students need in in terms of literacy. So um it looks more like a um if you're familiar with screeners and diagnostics, you don't want to stick with the screener because it just tells you that you need to you
need to know more. Um so I think of our A-reading assessment as that is just sort of the dipstick to say, you know, it what do we need to know more about? when we use CAPTY midyear that will be the assessment that gives us real information um that is um systemwide for
every kid um about what they need for literacy right so it will support our reading teachers but I think um bigger than that the that data should help our um core content teachers meet students needs better as they'll be able to see more of what um their students struggle
with as it relates to literacy um I'm excited to be able to come back and share with you midy year um information about what our um initial round of CAPD data looks like. Um, and that will also be when we have mid-year growth data. Um, the reading intervention teachers, sorry, are are so excited and ready to
have this data that they would like do it tomorrow. Um, and we want to make sure that we do write by students um to implement it well. Um, but I I'm really grateful that um this is an assessment that we'll be using. >> Um, if I could pause for a sec, director had a thought. >> Yeah, thanks. About that CAPD data or
the assessment itself. Is there is there a similar assessment being required in elementary or and and if so, what is it? Yeah. >> Yes. Yep. It actually starts in fourth grade. So, we have assessments um at the lower elementary level that have more um skill-based uh data, but starting in
fourth grade, so midyear, and I should have had it on both slides, so thank you for that. Um it will be um implemented in fourth through 12th grade. Um the the state gives you an option as a district whether to do what's called a gated approach, which means you use your fall
screener data to determine who the students are that need to know more about, right? And then use CAPY to assess for students who are below grade level or potentially below grade level in reading or um you can use that assessment across the board. We're working with our elementary um middle
and high school leaders right now to determine what will work best for students um across our system. Um but yes, so it's it's um we're going to have better data at the um grades 4 through 12 than we have had in years prior. >> Thank you for the question.
>> Yeah. So it's it's it's focused though on people that are behind. >> Yes. Students who um may need or absolutely need support for reading. >> So how how does how do we how does a person how does a student get assessed to to need to participate in it? >> Great question. So um typically what's
done is um a universal screener. So for us that was a reading in the fall, right? A reading and a math are our universal screeners. Um within the fastbridge system, we have cut scores that tell us who are the students who we need more information on. And we want to make sure that um for students who may
not be proficient in the spring. We also um we want we don't want to um leave it to chance. We want to make sure we catch anybody who may need additional support. >> Okay. So the screener catches them there's a problem. this this helps diagnose exactly where the problem is and then okay >> and then we have so the next step that
the literacy and the math team have put together is um decision charts so for each um sort of proficiency level or cut score and then each of the subtests within the um um the CAPY assessment it's essentially just a decision tree
like a diagnostic tree that a that a um um a medical professional would use right this test this this um treatment yeah thank you Thank you for the question. >> Director Minfeld, >> as I was reading through all of these um
wonderful slides and all the work that went into it, one of the things that is mentioned earlier is um we have a comprehensive assessment system which is what we've been talking about if it would be possible in the future to bring that back not only for literacy but al
also math when and it doesn't have to be soon but I just I know that's such a vital important part of accountability. um that we all want to understand. Um so in the future, but not today, but thank
you, >> Director Hoffman. >> Yeah, these are great points. The the more data is going to be better. Um you brought up a really good point. Um just looking at one sample of data now in October, the end of October. Um I mean
the test scores did come out in August, so perhaps we could revisit reviewing those, but we need more data. We need more information. I mean, World Series is tonight. They're looking at those statistics consistently to make con, you know, continuous improvement. So, if we
could have more data, to um encourage the growth, to review things, um to ensure that our kids get the best possible attention so that they can have the best possible outcomes. And I'll just add board members, you know, we're working on a data dashboard system that will make that real-time
data available for not only you, but our community and parents and others. So, we're still in the process of implementation of that. And you've had a few updates on it. So, we're excited about getting to that point where, you know, as real as it can be, we can have that real time and um live data, right?
So, and then as was mentioned earlier, as we do some of those assessments in certain parts of the year, we we will share that back out with the board. So, you can see that progression over the course of time that we believe is making the impact on moving the needle on these
these uh overarching assessments. >> Okay. All right. So, we'll talk about there are lots more slides about high school. Um so start with the three um MCA slides. So we saw a small um decrease by
1% from 24 to 25 for the district and you'll see the state is on the right side for these. So the bars on the left are no Henipin students. Um so from 35 to 34 as we move on to read and that's in grade sorry >> do you have any sense of what percentage
of students didn't participate? That's that's been a big ongoing concern uh for districts across the entire state. And so as we're looking at this data that that's what my wonderment is. Are we talking 60% took it last year, 82% this,
you know, I mean, what are we re are we really are we able to compare is really what I'm asking. >> That's a great question that I can get back to you on. I would have known it in uh past years because I just had it off the top of my head, but I don't hear yet. It is highly likely that this is
the lowest p uh percent participation and it is across the state. um when we moved to high school. >> Yeah. >> Uh I have a quick thought. So last year when we had gone over this, I had kind of asked the same question and uh Dr. John Roma hurt um steelman is how we
describe it. Kind of the MCA test meaning remove the known discrepancies that aren't normally accounted for. So if students are doing PSO and we know they're not taking it and they probably would have passed, account for that. They don't take it, account for that. All of that is to say, all of these results are still available um from
previous board agenda, just attachments. And with those things accounted for last year, the results were only a few percentage points different. So, it doesn't dramatically change anything. So, unless there's been a sudden dramatic change in
students taking it, I would expect about the same thing this year. So, just throwing that out there. >> Thank you. >> All right. Right. So in reading at the high school level, it looks almost exactly the same, right? So u um significantly higher though baseline. So
um we're at 53 and then 52% here just higher than the state average. And then in science again though this is the third time uh third and last time I'll say um baseline. So our baseline in Noah Henipin is starting at 34% um at
the high school level for science. All right. So um what you're seeing here is I would say a um a huge area of celebration for Anoka Henipin that I want to um name for the public. Um so 90% of our seniors that's
all seniors um take at least one uh college and career readiness course and 80% of them take two or more. So that includes students who might be attending college and career courses their their entire school day. um this and and you see that the trend has been up over
years. So I would say um this is one of the areas that I would really love for um our our leaders and our teachers to be celebrated for. When I move to graduation rates on the next slide, we are relatively stable. Um
it's sort of, you know, bopped back and forth between about 84 and 80 88 89% over the last number of years. Um, and same for what you see at the bottom is the four-year dropout rate is very low. Um, the other piece of data that isn't
on this slide, but I will name is the majority of our students who don't graduate do stay with us um for fifth years and on until graduation. So, we have a um very strong retention rate amongst our students um who we don't successfully get to graduation within
four years, which is another thing I'd like to celebrate our um high school leaders and teachers for. So um particularly at the high school level. So here this is where it gets um much more complex to make sure that we are meeting the needs of students who
may need um significantly more support than the school day um seems set up to provide. Right? So um we need to make sure students are getting um access to their graduation requirement coursework. We need to make sure that they are feeling and being successful in their
graduation um you know required courses but we also know that there are students who have made it through our system who need intervention at the high school level. Um so we are continuing to work with our math and literacy coaches at the district level. I have the privilege of being a part of whenever I can make
it the um high school literacy coaches meeting. They meet every other Friday um for part of the day at the district office. So I try to join them as much as I can in order to support them. And one of the things that they do is they see it their job not just to support say reading teachers right and ELA teachers
they've actually bridged across all of the content areas to coach teachers in science and in social studies um etc on uh how to better meet their students needs who may have um reading gaps. Um so one of the things that we're also looking forward to in November um and I
meant to mention this um earlier in the presentation is um the state has not yet released their approved intervention curricula for um for reading. Um and one of the gaps that you know has been true sort of across um the state and and the nation is a lack of adequate um
intervention materials that are um for designed for secondary students. Right. So my hope when we um are implementing the CAPY assessment midy year is that we also that is paired with really good timing from the state where we have um recommended intervention programs so
that we can make sure we can match um appropriate intervention programming with um the scores that our students show. Um I'm looking forward to being able to share that with you, but um what I wouldn't want that to sound like is that we don't have a plan in the meantime. So, um, Scott and I have been working,
um, on making sure that we have a plan to support students receiving special education services at the middle school level who are in reading classes with, you know, do they have, um, appropriate support from the licensed teacher who has the reading license and also support
from an IEP perspective. Um, and we um are supporting our middle school reading teachers with um the materials that they need that aren't necessarily the purchased once the state comes out with their recommendations, but we have several different options that they have. And we we actually did a day-to-day for our middle school reading
teachers um a number of weeks ago so that they could come dig into their fall data and and move forward. Um they are some of the most committed to making sure that they meet each student's needs um that I have seen in this system. So, it's um it's been really good to work alongside um executive director her to
support them and um making sure we're being inclusive of students who receive special education services as well in those in those programs. Um we have have a behavior intervention model that supports social emotional needs of students and um again at the high school level we're using OLA in order to get
our teachers the um training they need for readact requirements. >> Director Hulman. So, if I understand right, um the state hasn't released yet what they what their approved program would be for that intervention materials. Um I'm not sure
certainly don't know what others on the board um are thinking, but I know that in that kids have limited time. We need to get something in their hands as soon as possible. So, from my perspective, I hope that we can find a really the best
program. um look at the research and the evidence that says this is a great intervention program that has a history of being successful and um I I'd like to see us start using it as soon as possible. If it's not funded by the state that would be a great
disappointment, but I would rather have the best program possible in our students hands as soon as possible. >> Thank you. All right. So, um the fourth of the areas of um the kacker is achievement
gap closure. So, I'm going to go go through several slides here um and then we'll have an opportunity for questions as well. So, um what you're seeing here is the dark green is us and then the light green is the state. And so this is trying to um give a a visual representation of where we are compared
to the state in terms of meeting the needs of our diverse population. So the percent of uh Noka Henipin students at or above grade level in all six ethnicities where we had enough students um to report um outperform the state. And then the other piece that feels really important is on the far right
side of this um slide and it's uh the same as the next few slides. You'll see that our students receiving free and reduced lunch, special education services and ML services are also um above the state. So we are um meeting more of those students needs um than our
peers across the state. As we look at reading um the same is true aside from for our Asian subgroup. So all of the other subgroups outperform the state. um across the board, both all students and across the board. And then the same is
true in science as well. So um even though this was a new assessment um AC in each of our groups, aside from our for our Asian students, we are outperforming the state in this first round of the assessment. Now what I would want to make sure um and we do in the rest of these slides
we're doing is we're comparing our trend over time as well, right? So not just looking at the state but also seeing if we are making a difference for the students for whom we serve. Um so the next slide looks at >> I have a thought real quick if that's all right. Um I just want to speak to kind of the underlying philosophy of the
idea of an achievement gap because if you take you could pick any of these really um math. I'm assuming the achievement gap means um well just the gaps between the various ethnicities but even if you take um white students who are at 62% which
is the highest and every other ethnicity um exactly match that was 62% across the board we're still failing over a third of our students and I mean in science you could pick science the highest again 36% even if every ethnicity was at 36%
that's abysmal so I I understand these are very well put together slides and I get that this is part of the Khacker like kind of the metrics they use but I I don't personally find um this to be a a metric that really
speaks to the success or lack thereof of the district because like I said even if every student was at even if there was no achievement gap we'd still be at 36% for science. So, I would rather just see achievement period, just what are how are students doing? And I just like to
see the percentages as high as possible, not just no gaps between the percentages, if that makes sense. So, I I think it's a flawed metric to say the least. But again, that's that's nobody's fault. These are very well put together slides, very well put together presentation. I just wanted to speak to the philosophy of it.
>> And and just one comment, thank you for your uh perspective on that. These are things we are required to report on at the state level. We want our for the board and the public to to know what we are required to include in our report. Um that's an annual uh part of our CACER report. I almost
said world world's best workforce again. Um we just want to make sure that the board's in tune to what you know data we are submitting or they're they're evaluating all districts on. >> So thanks I appreciate you saying that so we could have that reminder.
So the uh next series of slides are us compared to us right so year-over-year. Um so we saw a gap reduction of 2% um for our free and reduced lunch students who qualify for free and reduced lunch and those who do not. Um and then we um
reduced the gap between students of color and white students by 1%. This is math. Then in reading we remained steady. So um the and then I would say so if you look at the right side we actually saw um 1% increase in
the gap between white students and students of color in reading and now you look at science it looks the dotted line is to not compare from year-over-year but what we are starting with is a gap of 17% and that is true both for free and reduced lunch um and
and those who are not and students of color and their white peers. All right, at the college course level, um we talked a little bit about this earlier. So, um we are seeing significant decreases over time. If you look at the left side in terms of our students qualifying for free and reduced
lunch, um the students who do not qualify are about staying pretty level. Um but the students who do qualify um have increased significantly over the last five years. Um and we actually saw a 4% increase last year from 80 to 84% of those students taking college
courses. Um, and then the gap between our white students and students of color, um, it increased, but if you see, so, um, sort of to, um, uh, Chair Arco's point, um, we saw both sub subgroups go up, right? So, that's what we want to see. We want to see, um, an increase for
all of our students, um, in order to make sure we are better meeting all of their needs. Now when we look at grad rates um we saw a a gap reduction of 1% on um the free and reduced lunch and naan and then um a
decrease of 1% on the other side. Um the the note here is that both went down well the the decrease is because our um graduation rate for our white students went down 1%. So um it's a gap reductionish. Um and then we will go to
the next slide. Okay. So um one of the things that we do and I think this is I've been mentioned um a number of times in the presentation is we need to look at each child and their needs. That's what an MTS a strong MTSS system does. So our teachers and our principles do an amazing job of making sure that they
know um what the needs are of each student that's in front of them in the classroom. Then planning for as I had mentioned before first tier one instruction only then tier 2 andor tier three instruction. Um and only at that point would we look to um support a
student by um potentially going through the um evaluation process for special education. It's our job to make sure that we meet students needs the best we can um prior to then. Um our MTSS system includes um pieces that are around best instruction um assessment tools. So um
the CAPY assessment will be integrated into right that that system as soon as we have that data mid year. Um we look at um indicators of engagement. So how engaged are students in the classroom and what are some strategies we can use to make sure that they are feeling welcomed as their whole selves in the
classroom. Um climate right like what's what's the climate like in the school building and or in the classroom to support student learning. Um and then of course student behavior and mental health supports to support the whole student. The next set of slides, um I those of
you who have been in these presentations before, you have seen um but I'll explain a little bit for the public. Um the orange dots, so this is a scatter plot of all of the schools in elementary um across the state and the orange dots are in Noah Henipin schools. So what we
would want to see that what you could sort of draw a trend line along the dots that's the trend line that shows um as a school's um free and reduced percent of students who receive free and reduced lunch goes down achievement goes up. So
it's inversely correlated. Um so what we want to see is that we serve our students um we we want to see of course increases in achievement across the board. So seeing the orange dots on the sort of top end of the rest of the scatter plot is what um Superintendent
McIntyre was speaking to earlier this evening around we we have schools that are beating the odds. We have schools that are in the top quartortile of their um peer group and they're better meeting their students needs um in a in a very similar um school population as as peers
across the state. When we look at our middle schools, they're also on sort of on closer to the top edge. Um so they are in some cases at the top of their cortile. Our high schools are sort of more like representative right across the board um similar to their peers
across the state. The next um the the one that I was just speaking to was math and now we move to reading. So reading when you see our elementary schools, they are sort of embedded in um their peers aside from a
handful that you see sort of off the top um that I'll be talking to about in just a moment. Middles are trending toward the top of that scatter plot. Um so in some ways better on the higher end of meeting their students needs in reading. Um and then our high schools again are
sort of equitably distributed with their peers. So this slide is the one that feels um like if if I were to choose a slide as these next two are sort of the highlights of the evening because one of the things um if if we're a system that believes in continuous improvement um
which I believe we are um we need to make sure that we look at the places where we see um early indicators of success. We learn what is happening at those sites and with andor in those classrooms and we learn from them. Um so what you see here the math
box um 16 of our elementary schools are in the top quarter of their peer group in terms of meeting their students needs in math. Three of those schools are at the very top spot and that's for serving all of their students. Right? So um when
we look at reading we have six of our elementary schools in the top quarter of their peer group and two are in that top spot all the way over to the right. Six of our schools are in the top quartortile for both reading and math. So, we've got to be looking at what's happening in those schools and celebrating them and then learning from
them. We have six middle schools. They're all in the top quarter of their peer group and that feels like a huge celebration um for us as a system. Four of those schools are leading their peer group. Um hold on, go back. Sorry. Um
and then when when we look at middle schools, four of them are in the top quarter for reading, right? So we've got a huge majority of our schools that are in the top quarter of um serving the similar students. One of our high schools is in the top quarter for math and two in the top quarter um for their
peer group and one of our high schools is leading in both of those areas. Let's go to the next slide. So this is um the first the slide I just spoke to was the whole student population. And then this slide is a little bit different which why there are more schools. This gives our schools the
opportunity to be compared to their peers in um a specific student group. Right? So that might be students receiving special education services that might be students receiving uh multilingual services. So 23 of our elementary schools are in the top quarter with it for at least one student
group and four of those schools uh led their peer group in at least one student group and then again across the board. So, I won't read all of these numbers to you, but um these two slides feel like a real um an indicator for me as a new leader to the district that there are places that I need to seek to learn from
our educators because they're doing some amazing things um that we need to make sure we are able to replicate across the system. And then this is when we're looking at districts. So, the other slides um were schools and this is our district. So, and then the green is the state. So you
can see that our orange dot we are in the the sort of green that's the cortile that we fall in um and we are above the state um in math and then we are just above the state in reading as well and I am confident with our uh new curricula and the support that our teachers are
getting um we will continue to move up in reading as well. What I am most excited about is to be able to share this data with you next time. >> Um because we will have had a year um of supporting the system. I will have had
the opportunity to learn more about um the amazing things that are happening in our classrooms every day. Um thank you and questions, comments. >> Any questions or comments from board members? Director Hawkman.
>> Yeah, thank you. That's um definitely want to celebrate those things, the schools that are excelling that they're doing great things for our students. Um we so appreciate the hard work of those educators and everyone in the system making certain that those things happen.
also want to u make certain that we sadly realize that the state of Minnesota is having some declining ranking as far as comparison to the rest of the country um and even some of those um international tests.
I hope that district 11 can capture these things and Okenipan schools um our initiatives forward especially in reading and that we turn that trend around um because it's good to look at this data as a whole school um how our schools are performing and and learning
from those places that are excelling. Um, but we got to remember this is really about individual kids and when parents are sending their their students on the bus each day, it's to make certain that they're getting those foundational principles and um just eager to continue working hard to make
certain that every kid has an opportunity to excel >> director Langenfeld. >> Thank you. Thank you for this presentation. and it um clearly is a a huge effort that you had to put underway. So, thank you for that. As we
think forward, one of the things that um when I'm out to our visiting our schools, I know that we have students coming into our schools who have not been part of our system. So I think what I really want to know is is also as part
of the data is how do we how do we do when we have that child here in front of us are is that child performing very differently if they're a K12 student in an NOA Henipin and then how do we onboard new students
to us so that they can have an accelerated opportunity if they have not if they're not at the same level that their peers are when they enter. So, it's it's it's two different prongs. But I but I really um know that as you and
we didn't talk anything about mobility and I don't know and unhoused youths and some of the the opportunities particularly at our our secondary schools. We're hearing about that a little more and seeing that is and I'm not suggesting we should not support
that student, but I want to make sure that the students that are with us that we have everything that they've been afforded and then also look to see how are we doing when kids come to us at different points in their careers and
embrace them as well and lift them up. So, and I I know people have talked about that before. So, >> and that's when all of our interventionists step in. Dr. Langenfeld, >> coach Arco, just just a quick comment. Our and we've shared this data with the
board in the past and we'll do it again. You hit on an important point. Consistency matters. The students that are in our system and we we have the data for those who have been with us. um the success we have versus um how do we
you know that MTSS system is how do we respond when we when we students who haven't been with us come in and based on where they're at how do we meet them where they're at and get them you know accelerating through as fast as we can and that system really is important to to do that right but we will follow up
we provide that information to the board um each year around a breakdown of uh those differences Director Deshaine, >> thank you. I just want to say that I appreciate the forward focus that you shared with this data. I think that was
a really helpful framing. Um, at the same time acknowledging the room for improvement that we all see and I think you can hear a strong commitment from this board on that. Um, you know, student achievement in academics is so important. our focus on doing the best we can for students with the budget that
we have is a primary goal of this board and I just um I can see based on the discussions we've had before that this board has found that on literacy and I just really hope that we can find that focus too on the other subject areas that are ahead of us because it's going
to matter and we're going to continue to want to see strong results um on this this one indicator. So, thank you for sharing that that forward focus. So I have some thoughts as well. Um so last year because there there's
actually a large controversy around the MCA test and its trustworthiness and there are fair points on both sides of the discussion I believe. But last year I went ahead and took the 11th grade math MCA test myself just to get firsthand experience with it. I have done the same thing again this year. And
so just to give the quick summary of it, I did well I actually did 55 problems, but I guess it's only 47 problems long. Um you can go to the MDE website, load the sample problems. You're not going to get all of them, right? I think there's 80 some available. I chose every option, you know, from the complexity one
through three, all the different types of questions. And I just took them in order. Um and I recorded my answer and then check checked the results. Of the 47 I did, I got three wrong. So I got uh 44 out of 47 about 93%.
Um and the reason I do this is because I am well a mechanical engineer by degree and so engineers use a lot of math. So if there's one subject I understand well it's going to be math. Um and so my my assessment of the MCA test as
confusing as the grading scale is is the same as it was last year. If you know how to do math at well an 11th grade level, you should be able to at least pass the test. Probably do much better, but at least pass the test. Cuz again, my understanding, and anyone can correct me on this, is you only need somewhere
on the order of like half of the questions correct to pass. So I think really you should be doing much better than that. But it is a good test in terms of again according to my judgment in terms of just assessing if students can do math. And so I think there could
be better tests, but I I wouldn't fault the MCA at least for where it's currently at. We'll see when they start to change things around next. I believe it's next year for the math, but at least for now, again, I think it's a good test. So, the reason I point the reason I um kind of did this one is because um 11th grade math, we're at
it's a 30 uh 34% pass rate last year. So, about twothirds of our students are for whatever reason unable to pass the test. Oh, and I should say when I had asked, I guess it takes them around an hour to finish it. It took me about to get through 47 problems about 65
minutes, which assuming I'm at least somewhat better at math than a high school student, it should probably take them a little bit longer than an hour. Um, so that says to me either they're not trying very hard or perhaps they don't know some of the questions, so they just skip through them. But we'll never ultimately know because there's no penalty for not
trying. Um, but the the reason I point this out and the reason I kind of bring this all up is because there's a massive discrepancy in just what our students know as demonstrated by the MCA tests of all the subjects and then how many students
graduate. And so in 11th grade, if we're going to say that only 34% of students can pass the MCA, the the math test and thus no math at grade level would be the conclusion there, but then we're still going to go on to graduate, you know, somewhere north of 90% of them. Um, that
discrepancy, it's it it's not at best it's not reflective of what our students know and at worst it's somewhat dishonest. And it kind of raises the and this is just one subject. You could pick any subject, but it raises the broader question of what does
a high school diploma mean at the end of the day. I've always assumed it to mean that you know the information that you've been taught. So you know math, you know how to read, you know history, you know all the various things. But if the one verification that we have of
that, as imperfect as it may be, begs to differ, but then we go on to graduate again north of 90% of our students. Again, it just seems like a very dishonest metric to me. So, I I think for the sake of um just being very clear
with the public as to where we are on these things, we should do one of two things. We should either firmly stand on the MCA's test and trust it and say this is a good metric. we can trust it. Uh because we've had discussions in the past, some board members tr like it, some don't. That's totally fine. Um but
if we don't trust the MCA test, then we should find a separate test up to and including making one ourselves that we can stand on that is transparent and that we can actually just give to the public after the fact and say, "Here, your students took this test. There's
100 questions. I'm just making this up. And you know, the reason they failed is cuz they only answered 35 of them correctly out of 100. That's an F by any metric. Or conversely, if they passed, your student answered 80 out of 100 of these correctly. It it would be much clearer for the public to understand at least how the grading works. I have on
two two separate occasions in the past, um I think one of them was a work session, I've at least thrown the idea out there that we do this, and there has it's kind of been shot down both times. And so the only path that makes absolutely no sense to me is to keep
using the MCA as a metric, but then to say that we don't trust it and then go on to graduate 90 plus% of our students despite the fact that they've demonstrated that they cannot apparently pass the just to pick one the MCA math test. We need to bring these things into alignment. We need to have a clear
metric for the public that we stand on that that actually agrees with the graduation rates. And so I'm just throwing that out there. I I I think this is a very well put together presentation. I love the data. I love looking at I'm not faulting anyone in
the district. I just the philosophy of here are the test results and then we just move on. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. And then I think Director Hulman kind of also alluded to this, but I want to bring it up. I also just as a general philosophy, I don't particularly care about what the rest of the state is
doing because the state is kind of like the Titanic. the whole thing is sinking and it doesn't really matter where on the Titanic you are. If we're at the top of the Titanic and, you know, another district is towards the bottom, well, we're all going down with Titanic. And if over the years the test scores have been steadily in decline and decline and
decline and decline, like at some point, I just want to see the students achieve. Again, kind of what I was saying earlier, not relative to other students or in this case, not relative to other districts. I just want to know that they can do math, period. I want to know that they can read period. Not compared to
other people, just they can do these things in the way that they're supposed to. So again, I know that currently we use that as a metric. I'm just being honest. I' I'm not faulting anyone in particular for this. I just find it to be a somewhat dishonest metric because it it kind of it it masks everything and
well, we're doing better than the rest of the state, but then the part we're not saying, as director Hokman alluded to, is well, the state's not doing that well either. So it's it really doesn't say anything to what we're doing. So I hope in the future going forward, either we can trust the MCA test and stand on it or find a better metric that is
crystal clear that we can stand on. Those are my thoughts. Any other board members have comments or question? Director Langenfeld, >> as as we think forward, um as you were speaking, uh co-chair Arco, I was
thinking about uh the opportunity a couple weeks ago when I went out to the STEP program and I think that some students go into these assessments and they are highly skilled in a technical area and and quite frankly, they can do
great math, but they might find this um that exercise not helpful and that's why the state keeps looking to say should we be looking at ACTs should we be looking at another metric because if the student
isn't engaging in it because it it's meaningless to them you know unless parents find it helpful to their student or if we're using it as something that we are going to make decisions about that child about and if it were something in real time but the results
don't come out for months. And so you you raise a really important point. What are the what are the metrics or how do we share that a student actually has gained the knowledge and skills uh that we need them to achieve before they walk
out with a graduation certificate because we do want that child prepared for the future. We want them to have options to a future, whether it be a two-year or a four-year college, a career, the military, or directly into the workforce. All of those things
matter. So, how are we preparing our kiddos for that? And and and I think it's a really good point, and the MCAs for many students does not, you know, certainly address what they know and can do. So it more
discussion later, but I certainly think it's an important thing that we as a board should continue to have conversation about. >> Just to follow up on that, um to your point, you know, and I I'll always admit this te there is no such thing as a
perfect test, but it tests generally are still the better the best way to measure something like this is what colleges do. Um, I believe you and I, uh, Director Langfeld, there's a retired teacher who gave us a packet kind of speaking to something unrelated to this, but in that
packet, there was MCA test results from, I want to say it was like two decades ago or something, and they were in the 80%. And so, for whatever reason, um, we used to be able to do this. And I I'm not going to even take a guess as to why we can't now. I'm not, again, I'm not
assigning blame to anybody. I just know it certainly is possible to get achievement up to 80 90% and we're just not currently doing it again for whatever reason. So any other thoughts or comments from board members? Um otherwise
thank you guys so much for the presentation. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So our next agenda item is item 9A the phase 3 budget reductions and reallocations process. Welcome again, Superintendent McIntyre and Michelle Vargas, Chief Financial Officer.
>> Oh, did you Sorry. >> I I don't know how long this presentation will go. If it's over an hour, could we take a break at some point in time if we're going to go? >> Just maybe not this moment. I don't need >> If you want to take a break, just let me
know and we can we can pause for five minutes. >> Well, I don't I don't know if anybody needs it. So, >> we schedule 45 minutes. It just depends on how many questions board members have. So, um, this could be as good a time as any or we can plow ahead. >> Well, we have and then Okay, this is this could be longer than 45 minutes,
but >> never know. We'll see. >> Yeah, let's just take a fivem minute break. That's totally fine. >> That'd be great. Thanks. >> Okay, we'll be back at 8:58. way back. >> Oh, I know.
So, now we're going to tell They have like a bunch of first and stuff. Please. My turn. Yeah. All right. Well, we're superintendent will return shortly, but
we're at the end of our 5m minute break. So, if you guys would like uh feel free the finance >> or we'll wait for superintendent. Okay. >> Yeah. All right, superintendent's back. We will begin the meeting again and I'll
hand it over to Superintendent McIntyre. >> All right. Well, thank you board members. Um, tonight we're updating the board on our phase three budget reduction and reallocation process. So, I do want to just take a moment to say thank you for your work through all three phases. Um, you know, these are
tough decisions and u some of these are the maybe the most difficult yet, but um I know that you all share the um common goal of doing our best to support our programs and and do that in a in a balanced budget. So over the past two
phases, I I'll go through some some updates here or just I always assume there's someone who hasn't seen this before. So I'm going to quickly go through some background information before getting to phase three. Um so if we go on to the uh next slide, um I'll
try to move us on here. Thank you. So tonight we'll review phase one and two reductions. we will uh get an overview of the um phase three uh target again from from our team and then we'll get into that phase three uh options that we've been working on over the last few
months. Quickly uh as this has been covered in previous meetings and uh our community meetings we recently had why we're here. So this has really been true through all three phases with our limited and I will say board members having uh stable growth enrollment right now is actually
a positive thing as you saw we we projected even lower than we've had. So we we really that's a success story right now as larger districts uh in the state have seen greater uh student enrollment loss along with the uh co relief funds going away uh larger than
budgeted contract settlements increased cost for operations and no new money projected from the state with uh other requirements that do require resources that haven't been fully funded has put us in this spot. On the next slide here, you can see that
uh we we look at a wide range of u kind of parameters and influences to our budget. Everything from our district priorities that have been talked about tonight to enrollment, our programs and services that we offer. Uh looking at restricted and unrestricted funding areas and how dollars can use. We always
consider our fund balance. We've talked a lot about that as well as looking at our uh uh actual school level class sizes and schedules within our system. So, as we moved on to through uh phase
one, we did this early in the spring of 2024 uh to try to get out of what we anticipated needing to be done later in the year. We did a $5.1 million reduction that impacted about 50 positions either through reductions or reallocations. And um those were communicated
throughout the system through our communication channels. Phase two then uh we started uh over the summer two years ago and we made another $9 million of reductions at the central office uh central services uh really across all departments u that were
really there was an impact literally every department in the system resulting in approximately 176 positions being reduced or reallocated in the system and uh those went into effect this past July 1. So uh and in and the impact of those
uh reductions really have been felt now as the school year started in September for about 7 to 8 weeks. So we'll just do a quick highlight of our uh overview budget overview. We've had Michelle Vargas here many times and
we'll do just a quick review of those um basic foundational things of our budget. >> Thank you, Superintendent McIntyre, members of the board. Um, as we've reviewed this slide before, our total budget is a $780 million budget. The reduction in deficit that we're looking
at is in our general fund, which is a $700 million budget. Our other funds are not available to backfill this deficit. It's not allowed by law. Um, if some of them do go into deficit, actually, we're required to offset them with the general
fund. On the next slide, it shows the breakdown of the budget. um as we went through the process of um implementing this budget and tried to break it down into large other different chunks than we have maybe in the past just salaries
and benefits. Um we have a large portion of our budget that is restricted which is by statute and how you can use that the 126 million. We have federal grants that are highly restricted 6.3 million. There's some miscellaneous grants and fundraisers. That's also things that
when the funds come in, there's a specific purpose for it, 2.5 million. Um, we have an assigned amount that's spending the onetime funds of 9.4 million. Then we have a very large area of special education. Although it's not a restricted funding source, it is
restricted for the point of you must maintain effort um in that. So, um it still makes it somewhat restricted from that standpoint that the the amount that you spend per student um per student that is special needs, you're still
spending the same amount. Um then you get into our unassigned area and we broke it down with our PK-12 program. So, that's the programs that are running throughout our buildings. Um then there's our operations. that 83 million
is our transportation and then our our facilities operations and buildings and grounds. So that's just all the mechanical and then also all of um your heating, electric and that type of stuff and custodial. Um our unassigned central
services is when we've talked about where the majority of the budget reductions up to this point have come from is those central services that are done in um whether it's district support services which would be like my area finance payroll accounting HR um or
curriculum our centralized curriculum centralized technology those are the the unassigned central services the unassigned other 36 million those are different areas of the budget where it isn't a specific speific spot. Um, and some of it, 10 million of it is the
cross subsidy entry. It's not it's not something you can spend or reduce. It's a required entry. There's a pension entry in there. Um, and those are in that larger document that show those items. So, they're not that they're items that just are freed up. They they
have specific items, too. So, as we get to the next page, as we've been finishing and closing up fiscal year 25, um, and then projecting into 26 and then 27. So, as we um put through
the entire 26 budget um and finished 25, we experienced um lower costs on some of our contracts, our our staffing that we noticed to the and then we are also seeing increased offset of our insurance
premiums with getting a a higher reimbursement from the OPED trust for our retirees and then also seeing less of our staff taking family insurance or taking insurance altogether which reduces our premiums that are then transferred into the internal service
fund. So the result of that was our original projected deficit for fiscal year 27 26 and then 27 rolling into it was over 15.5 million. We've now adjusted that target and the target that we've been working on is that $8 million target.
I'll turn it back to Corey. So just a couple uh points I want to stress uh board members. Thank you um Miss Vargas. So the phase one and phase two summary document is an appendex in your materials. Uh we've included that the last few meetings and that appendex that
was referenced was about 75 slides of a funding source breakdown by staffing and non-staffing areas um throughout all the different categories uh identified. And that also also has been provided a number of times here throughout our process. And then a note that I missed
earlier is um just as we think of about our budget, you know, 80% of our overall budget staff. It's people and those those non-staffing areas, you know, roughly make out about 20%. And um I just want to make a point to tonight is
our continued discussion after, you know, a few weeks of gathering more input and and uh information and developing some additional options. No decisions being asked of you tonight. that is still scheduled for um our meeting on December 8th.
All right. So, we'll keep moving through and that timeline kind of laid out that process. And I'll just highlight again, we just over the last few weeks went through the community meetings uh process that um really happened from end of September through um right before MEA break in
October. All right. Thank you. So, we can move on to the next. So this is our September 8th discussion just by quick review was a some initial considerations for the board to wrestle with and and have discussion about because we knew we had COVID relief funds of about 8.6 6
million that we knew when we received them would go away and sunset at some point and those have. Were those positions uh in our system that we used for funding? Uh what are those? And this was a breakdown of those uh those
positions on the left. on the right hand side of this this slide is a some additional uh options or considerations for the board as a starting point for discussion either items discussed in the past or additional areas that the board would
look at for um potential options for reduction. So everything from a middle school schedule that we've talked about before to elementary, middle, and high school staffing uh reductions and um a potential coaching restructure for instructional coaches as well as some of
the supports in our system um for students. So those were some options on the right and those are paired up with with what was out of that um initial 8.6 million of COVID relief funds. So we knew that the um those would be a
starting point. And if we go on to the next slide, we began to talk about options. Then at the September 22nd regular meeting, there was strong feedback from the board um from that work session on September 8th
with the key themes being let's minimize the impact on literacy, let's minimize the impact on uh class size or staffing ratios, let's minimize impact on student behavior and academic intervention. Provides schools with flexibility where
we can. And um we came back on September 22nd with some revisions with some options for the board to think about. Now during that time, we also spent, as you heard earlier tonight, uh a number of meetings with our building and school leaders. And I'll get to that in a moment. But what what here what you see
on this uh first option slide is if if you um and I think can you go back one slide for me, please? Okay, we're going to start here. So that uh COVID relief fund item, you know, what we did on this option was we backed out at, you know, kind of the board's
interest, any uh positions that were funded this way, that touched literacy at the elementary level. So that initial 8.6 million was backed down then to 4.6 with the remaining positions still tied back to that initial COVID funding
source. Then we also discussed in this option a restructuring a potential restructuring of our K12 intervention and coaching model and redistribution or reallocation of of what would be remaining after um some reductions in
that area. Again we didn't have all the detail then. So as we move through the process we're providing more and more specifics. We also looked at a million dollars in reductions in administrative support at the site level and then also some reductions at the central office mainly in the areas of special excuse me
professional development and supplies and materials to get us to that $8 million that target that we had um as a result of the and if you look at um kind of on a second option here. So
if you go on to option two um as we worked through with our K12 principles and um we we brought the board forward a second option at that point for discussion. Again no decision just discussion in that option
a change or restructuring in our instructional technology support model for $250,000. Looking again at how to reminister our engagement coaches. So reductions there uh K12 a high school staffing adjustment
based on student choice and course um selections and especially courses that may cause students to be offcampus for different opportunities. Then uh still some you know there's still some positions in there that were those initial ers or covid relief fund
positions. So those district-wide supports in the areas of ministry of interns, social workers and counselors. So as we moved uh through that on if you go to the next slide then there's a little bit more here. So that second option then also included a bigger uh an
additional 300,000 so $700,000 of realignment of central office services and staffing um which we were working through at that point on September 22nd. So that 700,000 on top of the original 14.1 million that was already made
centrally. Some adjustments based on student case load and um eligibility categories and and student needs, child count shifts we can make in special education along with um that 300,000 in professional development and supplies
and materials. We also did talk then at the that evening the middle school schedule. So that seven to six period day with the intent of that's a way to maintain class size, increase instructional minutes and core academic areas, reduce transitions, align the
instructional time of teachers to the middle and um excuse me the elementary and high school levels and you know continue to evaluate the range of student choice in electives. But that was a $3.8 million uh budget cut. It has been you know we went back and looked at
this again. This has been discussed all the way back to at least 2009. This option has surfaced in different forms throughout um nearly 15 16 years now. Um when we looked at at the schedule piece now these these were the options we that
we got to based on working with our elementary, middle school and high school principles. These were the ones as we worked through nearly 12 hours of meetings with them and got their input and really steered towards uh these particular items. So this is the option we recommended at that meeting. That is
still the option I would say is the recommendation uh that the administrators that we worked through at the at the elementary, middle, and high school level along with our team. There was still at the board meeting on the 22nd a desire of the board to look at a different option. There wasn't um I
think in the end support at that point in time for the middle school schedule. So we have move we that's why we're now moving into option three. But I can tell you that that second option would be what you heard earlier tonight. And if you'd heard middle school and high school principal speak to, that was the
one with in partnership we developed with them. Um that would be the one that had the most uh support. So as I move into option three, uh be before we get into those details, we had the time and the opportunity to do our
community feedback sessions. So, we're going to spend a little bit time on the data that we have so far on that. Uh, we do plan on a kind of a second scoop starting tomorrow until uh November 17th for any additional feedback that the community wants to provide to us. So in
this uh data um we had our five openhouse meetings at our middle schools in those um attendance areas, our five key attendance areas and you can see a breakdown here of of the feedback and where it came from by those uh five areas and outside the district. You can
see the the breakdown there. So um in total we had u 60 residents attend those five meetings and about 160 comments were provided for board review in this particular sampling. So, some of the common themes here, uh,
as you've, you know, reviewed this, uh, con concerns about staffing and service delivery for students. Um, you know, like anyone would, they want, you know, they're wanting more detail on what the specific cuts might look like, and we knew that that would be coming forward
at this point in time and even more detail coming at the December meeting as we work through the process. Also, just we heard uh concerns around making sure we're um keeping safety and security at at the core front here at the forefront
here. And then also um um concerns about fewer elective options um for and and those concerns about advanced programming. So supporting our um high performing students around and then also concerns about academic interventions and and those safety nets for students
who might be struggling. Uh I did also send board members copies of the individual comments we took as a question. >> Yeah, we took identifying uh information off of that and you received that the other day. >> Yeah, my comment was just about that that is not readable. Is there a way to
format that in another way that probably >> okay I tried to print it. It's just like >> Yeah, if you just me being old because I couldn't do it in any in any way. So it would be great. >> Yeah, we probably but it'll make the document longer. You almost have to zoom it in electronically otherwise I printed it to and it is small. It's very small.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I it would be great. >> Happy to do that. Happy to do that. So as we stepped into phase three based on this feedback and where where we were, you know, at with phase one and two, the focus continues to be on those those board interest of focusing on literacy,
maintaining um staffing ratios and minimizing impact on class size, minimizing impact on student behavior and safety where we can giving flexibility to the to the site levels. And then there was interest by the board. what would a restructured or reorganized and re uh allocated coaching
uh instructional coaching model look like? So, tonight we're going to step into those areas. Um so, we're going to first just kind of tackle those questions about instructional coaching and intervention models and I'll have um our team um give you some details about, you know, where they landed after, you
know, lots of conversation. So, I think Annette and Ginger are going to review that for us. >> Yeah, thank you, Superintendent McIntyre. some of the things that we said and we walked away with this slide I think um at the last presentation too was that we want to continue to have conversations with our principles. So
looking at that in the future would be a a big priority for us but we want to also ensuring that we're focusing on our vision mission and core values that we would always continue to look and review our strategic prior priorities together with safe and welcoming environments increased student achievement and
effective organizational support. So looking at that, we heard what we were getting for feedback as well with prioritizing literacy support, restructuring a K12 instructional coaching model and intervention model that would also address the reductions at the secondary level due to cuts from
strategic investments of 27.4 FTE. Those were pieces that were brought forward that um some of the board members had mentioned about like the Blaine reroute room, the Kun Rapids Middle School SOAR program, things that were funded out of those strategic investments. Also to
continue to have conversations and define roles of instructional coaching and intervention and explore flexible staffing for our building principles to meet their student needs and to review and refine supports so that we're meeting the needs of the students at every level, elementary, middle, and high school as they progress through our
system. >> Director Dashaine, >> thank you. Is this an okay time for a question on that or do you want to go to the next slide before we ask questions about this model? >> We have a little bit more detail if you want to see a little bit more and then yes go there but we can do it either
way. >> Yep. >> Good evening co-chair Arco and co-chair Duchaine and members of the board and superintendent McIntyre. Uh before I go uh further into this
slide, uh I just want to say thank you uh for your time and care and thought as you are going through this difficult process as well. Uh these decisions are painful
and we want to acknowledge the weight of that responsibility. the information that you see here on the slide, the K12 instructional coaching and intervention model. I just want to say that uh these individuals, a number of these individuals do not have the
traditional classroom, but they work directly with students and teachers. These educators and professionals lead small groupoup instruction, provide targeted support, collaborate with class classroom teachers, and
coordinate assessments so that we can respond quickly for our students. Their work may be less visible but very essential in serving our students and supporting and strengthening instruction across the
system. As we review our model, we are going to continue to align with our core goals for learning, teaching, and safety.
allowing each school to use the funds where they're needed most. Keep the on the-job support for teachers, meaning retain expert instructional partners, advisors, mentors who work side by side with
teachers to support and strengthen instruction. also take into account and reflect the reductions already made through uh for secondary through strategic investments and the ESSER funds.
Also trying to keep in mind and build sustainable support ratios meaning ensure literacy, classroom support and student support are staffed at sustainable levels so that they remain focused and
effective. Targeted intervention support that direct instruction for students who need it most. We recognize the K12 instructional coaching and intervention model will face reductions
and we're planning with that reality in mind. At the same time, we are working continuously to try and support the ability to instruct, intervene, and
restore academic gains. And thank you for your consideration as we move forward. Thank you very much. Um, so a couple of questions on this model. So it looks like we're saying there are 64.4
reductions being considered in the model. How many total is that out of for the like the current strategic investments and ESSER funded coaches? Some other
>> I know we have the total. Yes, that's okay. And and then while you this the secondary question will go with this. Um, I believe when we talked about the change in the ESSER reduction from the full eight million down to account for
the literacy intervention staff that was previously funded through ESSER, are they now considered a part of this new model as intervention staff or are they still a separate bucket of intervention literacy intervention staff?
uh they are considered separate bucket uh from the intervention staff. >> Okay. >> And I can jump in here for a moment. Later in the slides, you'll see um when we get to the K12 instructional coaching model, that reduction of about 20 FTE is out of an allocation of 87.8
>> um FTE as it's rep represented in the slide in option three. So it's taking the elementary engage engagement coaches and the remaining FTE in the instructional coaching intervention model can combining those and then be reallocating what's left over. So this
is a what you'll see later is a 20 FTE reduction >> in addition to these items that are listed here. >> This is a breakdown of how we're you know I wouldn't want to speak for you guys. You guys can go ahead and speak to the slide. Are are you talking about the
strategic investments and the SR at the secondary level? Yes. That was just showing the buckets of what those were um total because the strategic investments were cut right from the start which takes away a lot of the supports that um you know coaching as well as intervention at the secondary
level. It takes away the district high school math and literacy coaches also the middle school instructional coaches who focus on literacy and also interventionists that do the work. So the similar terms would be that lit um that would be the intervention people um
MIT that would be the math intervention teachers at the elementary. So that's the same as like an intervention and I apologize for all the acronyms. We know it's confusing too and we want to clean that up and that will come with time. Um also then the coaching you know that's the different folks that are doing the
LS at the elementary level and the MS. And so when we look at this, there was a deeper cut in those areas from the strategic investments from the very beginning. So when we look at what we're going to look at doing is when we do the reduction of these positions, looking at how we can meet the needs of students
K12 by where can these cuts take place, where can the allocations be redistributed to meet the students needs throughout the system. So just the final bit of that I just want to make sure because I heard >> 87 total
people that are currently doing this work. >> 20 are proposed to be cut out of elementary in option three and we're already cutting strategic investments that was already a part of a previous board decision. So that's the 27.4 that
we see reflected here. That's not a a new cut, but that's a cut that was previously decided upon. And then the Esser 37, is that a new cut that we're talking about as a part of option three, or was that a part of a separate cut?
>> That is just a a pot of the ESRE money that's put into play for the secondary pieces and that some of those allocations were going to be cut with um the original proposal I believe in option one if I go back. >> Yeah. So it's correct 80 some cuts out
of 80 >> existing and >> I think you >> just to clarify before you move to a new question to clarify yeah the board determined that decision last November to sunset this a year early which is after this school year
>> the 27 right so the new proposal though it sounds like when I'm adding together all these numbers this it it sounds less like a restructuring than a full cut just based on the position and the numbers. So, I'm just trying to make sure I understand what we're saying when we're talking about a restructure.
>> Yeah, within the restructure, I think the focus would be to of course going to be need to be cut. So, we're going to try to minimize, not completely eliminate the pieces that are needed for intervention and coaching across the system. >> So, I'm as I was looking at and thinking
about secondary level cuts and strategic investments in ESSER. It it much of that was the flexibility in secondary and then I look at high school staffing reallocation of
23 FTE and much of that FTE as most of us are know were were used for support and intervention class size reductions. So what is left? You know, I mean, in all seriousness,
and how, you know, as I looked at this, my wonderment kept going back to the that you've got the middle school piece, and I'm not seeing a lot of reduction there. And I want to talk more about that. I it would be really
helpful, I think, to really look at that whole picture of what do we have in high school and what's in middle and what's in elementary because quite frankly there are things in there that um really how many FTEEs do we need to cut
overall? And I think that's been pretty established at $80,000 an FTE we're talking you know a hundred, right? So that's overall what that cut needs to look like. So then it goes back to where
does it hit and then you talk about looking at it in terms of is it a distribution model or is it a needs and programdriven model like you would for ML. We're seeing cut ML. What does that really mean when we have ML students who
come in who are new to the country versus the child who's been here six years? if you look at the WEDA standards and so forth. So those are the kinds of things that really need to be fleshed out in my head because there's a they when I look I
don't see much for high school. I mean in fact like to to director uh co-chair Dashaine's comment the numbers I kept putting numbers and sat with a calculator for a very long time. So that would be helpful to have that. So
>> and we do have that and we can easily follow up with you on that. So when you look across strategic investments when you carefully consider compensatory ed ers and honestly even our literacy aid up till
this point 64 FTE are on identified at the secondary level. Okay. um for reductions and in this next phase you know it looks like um up till now before phase three or option three it's
closer to 10 FD at the elementary because we the way the phase one and two have played out and we have this we can provide to you with the kind of detail you're looking for and it might make sense as I walk through option three detail some of those gaps might fill in for you because we kind of jump right
into some some details there so our our team's going to help with any questions you have but I did want to kind of point out um kind of big picture. The challenge here was in option two, if we don't do the middle school schedule change, we got to find 3.8 million of a
different cuts somewhere else. So option three is really intended to do that. We still got to get to that $8 million target. So I'll walk through at least option three um pieces so you at least have some understanding of how we get there.
>> Um I think director had a question. >> Sorry, I missed that. I do but continue and I'll come. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. So if we go Thank you. So this is just option three and again I'll come back to you. You know option two is the one that we had the greatest support for with our
building leaders. Um as you heard ear earlier tonight uh less support for that clearly um for option three. But this is an attempt to get at if we don't do the schedule um middle school schedule change then how how do we get there? So
um to start at the top here, this is there's some items that were previously in option two and this is one of them. The elementary technology support model being restructured. The high school uh staffing uh around student choice is a continuation. The um one of the new
pieces here to help us get to that gap of 3.8 and our ultimate goal of 8 million is a reduction in our K12 administrative interns which is 630,000. So there's 3.9 of those POS FTE elementary and 2.5 at the high school
level. The special education uh item is the same from option two as is the um reduction in professional development and supplies and materials. And then this is an adjusted uh item here on the bottom of this page. This
these original ers positions now down to and we started with 8.6 in discussion. This now still includes 1.8 million of those original staff positions. So this would mean a reduction of 12 roughly 12
out of 78 of those original and seven out of 56. So these are social worker and counselor positions. So you're talking about 20 out of 134. So it's about a 15% reduction in that in those roles of these jobs that were uh added
through COVID relief funds at that time. If we go out to the second page of this um option three or second slide, then we have um a multilingual
staffing reduction of 13 FTE out of 80 81 and a half FTE total. So this really um this reduces the amount of time not spent in direct instruction or service delivery as we're trying to protect the amount of teaching time that occurs. So
that would change you know schedules and other other non-eing time responsibilities. The K12 instructional coaching model is what we were talking about earlier. So this is a reduction of 20 out of the 87.8 8 uh 20 at the elementary level,
right? And it integrates in then that elementary engagement coach model. So this is a $1.6 million uh item. And then lastly, at the central office level, this 7 $700,000. So we didn't have this detail for you previously because we were still working on it. What this
would do is we would sunset the proposal would be to sunset the lease agreement at the at the Rapids Family Mall. And now that we have space from the phase one and phase two reductions in the ESC, we can move that enrollment center service to the central to the ESC
and and net approximately $350 uh,000 in maintenance, custodial costs, and mechanical systems and repairs. So we we didn't have that capacity before and I would tell you too and you we've reviewed this option for many years and many groups have looked at it. What has changed now is the advent of online
enrollment. So it does take uh helps most districts out with that process when it was mainly paper. It was much more challenging and we needed much more space for it. Um so this allows us in our our leases coming due. So now would be a good time to make that shift and
realize those savings. And then finally with the um ad with bringing on a new uh data dashboard and just the way uh things have evolved over time with how we do research evaluation and testing. This was an area our department we we
did make some reductions in but not in personnel last in phase two. So now that we're in phase three, you know, it's one of those areas where we feel like we can make some um some reductions in and uh make that shift to our online data dashboard.
So those two things combined get you to the 700,000. And when you add up these areas on the last, you know, the slide previously and this slide, it's a way to bridge the gap of that that 3.8 million that would have been middle school schedule and still gets us to the $8
million uh target that we're we're aiming for. Um may I'll just wrap this things up and then we'll get to all your questions. So the last slide here is just getting at kind of a in a summary sense. We step back and look at phase 1, two, and three. 22.1 million is what it totals.
Uh 14.7 of that or about twothirds of it are um done at the central office coming really out of the uh area that has about you know I think you saw earlier somewhere in the neighborhood of 4% of the budget. Um it is attempted to option
three attempted to meet those five items. How do we minimize staffing ratio at the core classroom level core academic areas uh and minimize impact on class size focus on literacy in those core academics. Um this without this
schedule maintains our current schedules and options and choice at the middle school level. It does avoid increases in transportation or bigger transportation cuts and we didn't go down that road because of just safety reasons around our district and and the hazards that are out there in transportation arenas.
Um and then being disresponsive to the feedback that we've gotten so far and when I say board direction just those interests the board has shared throughout you know the last few uh months. So, we made an effort to try to stay um centered as best we can on those
knowing that as it was said earlier, you know, these are these are painful. All the options being brought forward are not easy. They all have an impact. Um we've already felt in the first nearly eight weeks of school the impact of phase one and two when it really affects
the quality of response that we've been able to provide our sites at the central level. um we've already identified that and and uh know that that's real as we started this school year. So um I'll pause there. I know there's some other questions, but you know that that's kind
of the again for tonight's discussion. Uh we will follow up with additional we already got a couple follow up with some additional information that the board wants uh in response to your questions. So coacher, I'll turn it back to you. >> Thank you. I I want I want to go back to
the restructure that coaching model. Well, I don't I don't I don't think I'm following or I'm close but maybe or maybe I'm following. Um but we you know when we look we go back to option one what we talked about when we looked at er
position cuts and that was at uh that was without literacy intervention and academic support. You know not we go back to the beginning we looked at the er cuts on your first slide and I think
the board said we we want to protect the literacy intervention, you know, that intervention stuff in elementary schools. So then so then the first option one sort sort of had that at $4.6 million. So you could take all the ESRE
positions minus those and that's what that would be. But now we're talking about in this K12 model 20ft FTE for elementary schools. It if I'm gathering it right, that is
going to include some of the literacy stuff that we said we didn't want to cut. Right. I want to make sure I'm understanding that first of all. No, the the literacy intervention teachers that maintains the 32 that you had asked about um for um maintaining that and that's on that first part of the slide
there where it says 64 employees for 32 FTE. >> Um what has happened is that there is um more coaching so LSMS in a different bucket of staff that is closer to I want to say like 54 or 55 coaches. So we're
saying we would need to reduce 20 and look at a coaching model and literacy intervention model that would meet the needs of students and staff while also considering other things at other levels. >> Okay. So the the 20 is coming out of these MS or LS.
>> Yes. >> And and all right. So now my assumption has to be that the reason our principles are talking that they don't like this is because they think that's pretty critical. Is that correct? >> Director, that would be correct.
>> Okay. So, so I guess for me that this one's not feeling good right now. It can't possibly be. Hopefully, it's not feeling good to anybody sitting here right now because it isn't feeling good to me. So, I I need to go to school on that one.
Uh, and I'm going to invite any of the principles who would like to take me there to help me understand this one because I can't I can't I can't support that one right now just based on the feedback we got
tonight. So, um, and I don't sit in a position understanding those roles, right? But when they describe it as cutting it to the bone, this is critical stuff. I what I understand to me is they can't deliver on that intervention without u
maintaining that and I definitely want to be able to deliver on that intervention. >> Yeah. I think you you'd hear from our elementary principles I'd rather see class size increase than lose those positions. >> Yeah. >> Right. Yeah. >> But this board up to this point said don't don't mess with class size. >> Well that's correct. So I'm not sure
it's uh either or that's I'm not viewing it that way personally. So but on that one particular um okay I will learn from them. I'm I know someone will help me. And um and then just more broadly, I
don't understand why we're packaging these things so much. So like I see the things you've presented, they're sort of like a menu option. And I don't get why they something was 4.6, now it's 1.8. We're packaging them up differently, whereas how I see these all is they're
all options that could be selected to develop a a list of $8 million. and the the the bucketing them the bucketizing them into option one, option two, option three to me is preventing us from kind of getting there in my opinion. So, I don't know if
that's true or not. And I know that they're not all the same buckets. Some of them kind of are the same. They're standalone, right? You you uh central service restructuring, that's a standalone 700,000 could be chunk could be put anywhere. Some of them aren't because they're they're getting at
slightly different things, but um is there a reason I can't think about it that way even though you're not packaging it that way? Number one. And number two, why are we packaging them this way? To me, that is that's putting restriction on like why can't I swap something out? Take this from over here and put it over here. That would then we
might be able to be there. >> You sure could do that. And I would encourage the board members to look at it that way. That's how we started when we use the word consideration. >> Okay. So, it could be done that way. Y and some ask for what are your recommendations, right? So what ones fit better together than others, right? But you are completely right. You could
think of option one, two, and three as really a big set of choices. >> Okay. And my last question is just I think it's going to get back to the principles coming in here tonight, which is um until tonight I I didn't really have
concerns that when we said that our recommendations were coming forward based upon agreement with them that like I took that for granted that that was the case and I'm not feeling as good about that anymore. >> Yeah. So just to speak to that. So we
our the one that we have the most support across our systems option too. >> Yeah. I got that >> with the schedule, right? Other than that, then it gets into some really hard areas, right? Okay. >> And that's what they don't feel good about >> because it gets into some things they feel are pretty critical and and
>> um those are the things, you know, that are >> kind of that you're seeing now for the for the first time. >> Yeah. I think my last point I'm I'm going to go back to is the is the is the one that I think at this point we still have the
least transparency about which is is the non-classroom. It's the administrative stuff that where we still are is and because we haven't moved on this one bit is that we we just are told we have to accept at this point there's nothing more that can be cut out of the district
administration on whatever we want to call central service the everything that isn't right here. And that's pretty hard because like we we have gotten to the point here where we've gotten some of this to um pretty good detail. We don't we're still asking questions about some of it, but some of it's pretty
understandable. We get into that space. It's just like we cut a lot and that is clear and we cut a lot out of an area that had, you know, as a percent. I think you just said 4% of the total, but there's still a lot of dollars there. So, it's it's like um not having this
sort of detail for those types of choices forces us to just say, "Okay, we we will accept that that's the case." Now when we look at what was done through the schools th those leaders were forced to put forward ideas and
there here they are and um the same was not true for administration and I just think the board has to be the one to do that. No one's no one else can do that to the administration which is why I have asked for what everybody knows I've asked for in terms of that transparency. We still don't have it. So the problem
is we just arrive here again choosing between options and we don't really have the whole picture. We can't make similar choices of perhaps undesirable options being cut out of administration because we don't have it and I I'm still very frustrated with that. I guess I'd just
say in response and I appreciate you sharing that um you know we've continually offered to have more conversations with any of you around questions and I know one of the questions that came at the last board meeting a month ago was what about this unassigned other expenditures area that
has $36 million. The only area you can play with there is about $500,000 if you want to get rid of sobaticals for teachers. All the others are placeholders. We talked you, you know, tuition payments, cross subsidy, um, severance and retirement, long-term
subs, non-teer subs. Uh, all those areas are just accounting areas. We have to track funds. Those aren't unless we want to not do severance or not do long-term subs or any of those other areas. So even though it looks like a lot of
money, that is that's a way we account for and track those areas that are negotiated in contracts. Um for as far as further cuts centrally, the board can direct us to do that. I will tell you right now, we are losing people to other
districts because of workload. We are um providing a our ability to fully support our sites. They have told us it's not the same. It takes longer. it it it they can't you know we have fewer people and they're overworked and they're overloaded. My staff keep coming to me
saying this is too much and we're seven weeks in. So I can't make a recommendation to the board to say cut more in those areas because without it then we will we will have problems. We will have quality assurance issues. So I know not all of you agree with me on that and you're in the end going to
direct me to do what you're going to want us to to to focus on. But um we have people overwhelmed. We are going to have trouble keeping people to stay and we've already lost some and we're going to have a hard time filling those roles when there's no um these are very
specialized areas in a lot of in a lot of ways. So we have and I'm looking at my team we have fine tooth combed everything and we would come forward with more um you know the 700,000 that we found was that was a stretch. Um so um and you can find those things on the
uh you when you get dig into those unassigned areas at central departments uh we still got to be able to operate these departments and provide some because what's happening is it's falling back on the school buildings to take care of some of those um those those areas which we don't want them doing. We
want them focused on instruction, student behavior, um the the things that they have influence on. Um but I like where you started. These are this was a range of menu options. I my my hope was coming out of tonight with what ones rise to the top knowing that um these
are some different ways to get to that target and we got we got more time to get to December 8th for final you know where we can get a majority of the board to to support or or if some new things come out of the discussion then we'll we'll bring those forward too.
um Director Langenfeld, but would you actually mind if I made one quick comment and then hopefully you can actually add to it. So, kind of on the heels of what Director Adet said, um I almost want to reframe the conversation a little bit since there's three options, but there's different things in the different options to me and this is
where I'm hoping. So say otherwise if you disagree the two almost no-brainers in I believe it's option three which I think could be done anywhere are the it was that building agreement with like the Rapids Mall. I think it says in
the reduction is 700,000 but then in the details it says 350. So I don't I don't really know which it is but let's >> Half is R and half is the mall. >> Okay. So $700,000 savings. Couple that with the reallocation of staffing based
on student choice of course selection. That's essentially just acknowledging because of PSO uh we can actually I suppose cut 23 teachers and uh class size will remain the same essentially no change. So if you take those together
that's 2.5 million right there. um with effectively uh at least for the metrics that we're going with no impact to really anything. Um so we could almost just if you're willing again contradict me if you disagree
say we don't actually have to cut 8 million we're actually only aiming to cut 5.5 million. So either way, Director Langfeld, >> couple of things. First and foremost, I I um when I look at the central services, there's uh 350,000 out of RE
and I would like to see what the plan is. Um we saw a report this today um from multiple uh sources and we talked about getting more data versus less less data. And and I'm I'm not suggesting it
can't be done. I don't understand what that is. I think the last time we did some cuts, we found ourselves in a place where we didn't have enough detail and then only to learn later what was it's in the detail. I think it's so vitally important. Just heard the superintendent
talk about the fact that people are stretched so thin. I think we I I'd really like to know how that looks because data are really vitally important to drive instruction and um just just a little more detail in that
would be helpful before I could get behind that. Um the other thing my wonderment as we look at um and I would offer uh director Arco that co-chair Arco that that 1.84 84 million is actually tied to other things and I see
it as part of cuts in in high school. So what is that really going to look like? I know that FTE can be used to lower class size which it has been from my understanding and it unfortunately it isn't uh just a a place where nothing
has been used strategically to do that. It's the flexibility principles have used. I'm curious if the reroute room and part of that over and I haven't talked to to um uh principal Pasy about that but just wonderment about that. So
more detail there before I could get there but the other wonderment is as I look at elementary multilingual staffing why aren't we doing that K12 and why wouldn't that be based on student need versus a distribution? I mean, I those
are things as I I that jumped out at me when I was looking at it um in preparation for the meeting tonight and I know I had a little conversation even before coming in here because that that jumped out pretty big and it and it really varies from you know year to year
who's coming in and what how much time they need and so forth. So that would be another thing too is that as we're looking at these models and it goes back to my original um point and I I I'd like to see what it looks like at each level
and I'm still not understanding where middle school will end up um in this model. it doesn't appear there's a lot of impact and yet we've looked at that middle school schedule and I'm a middle school principal and I want as many
choices for our kids as possible. Um, but I also have to if we're cutting every support system we have and and and really spend, you know, um I I just don't know um that that is as
responsible. And maybe I again I I don't want to get ahead of it and say I understand all of this and this is what's happening, but I think it's just really important that we really look at priorities and needs based first before just a general distribution model. And
right now when I see as much coming out of high schools, I have some real concerns um there. And I also have real concerns about elementary, you know, so I'm trying to figure out what's actually going to be left on the table for each
of them if we go down some of these roads. >> Thanks. Uh I had a followup related to the 1.84 million for the high school staffing that she was referring to. As I recall when we talked about that maybe two meetings ago, uh it was a
conservative estimate and I think it I think you mentioned it, Miss Vargas, it didn't have like this this 1.8 was I think it was like community college related. So could we could we calculate I understand that to mean then okay
there's other kids in a PSO enrollment not in community college there's probably more could could we is it calculatable >> I believe so >> okay >> we can check >> okay that would be great to get I'm curious >> Nick Herman who was here
>> what is the to at this point we may as well know with as much precision as we can what that is or could be Um just a couple of clarifying pieces. I don't know if Dr. Ziggler you want to answer that part. I know the high schools have been working on this. So is
there anything you want to add right now or? >> Yeah, we are. Um we just uh we pulled some data from ACS and we've asked the principles to go deep into looking at why we have the students going to PSO and online. What opportunities can we have here? We have to start to consider the programming that we have at our
schools right now to entice our students to be able to stay here or give them, you know, the options of how you could stay in school because we want to make sure that we're not losing students that could um, you know, do the opportunities within our system. So, they are taking each of those lists and looking at last
year's students, where they went, what they did, if they earned credit um, and passed the course and detail to that effect and coming back and having conversations about that. Sorry. So, that seems bigger than just the not accounting for them when they're
not not counting them keeping them counted in the numbers when they're not present. But that maybe speaks to >> we want to get to more of the story of what is really happening behind the numbers. Um maybe looking at, you know, do we need to look at how we're doing things? I think some of the things that I know um from being a parent myself in
the system is that once you commit to going into a track and if you have a full-time music student, >> say you're at the Blaine Sums program and you want to do full-time music, you want to be in the Sums program, it gets very difficult for our students to take PE1 and PE2. >> Sometimes the schedule doesn't open up
until they're a junior in high school. And at that point, a junior is saying, "I don't want to be in PE1 when most of the kids are going to be in grade nine." And so some of those options we're looking at um could possibly like PE alternatives and things like that to take online um at other institutions.
>> Okay, good. Yeah, thank you. >> Yeah, >> and if this helps to clarify too when we're looking at this intervention model, I our students the total number of students are a system are the same. So looking at going backwards, some of the cuts that we are talking about right
now take all systems back. um some a little bit deeper um you know the high school and and to back to where they were pre um before we got the SR dollars like in the year 2019. So, for instance, like maybe a middle school has three or four counselors right now. They'll go
down to, you know, two or one. And then, you know, maybe they have two social workers now. They'll go down to one. >> If I that that part's that part I understand it's really just this >> intervention part which >> yeah,
>> given where things are and what we're trying to do with like reading and things that it has a special. So, I guess it in effect you could just take the er part out of it. I guess what I'm saying is >> prot let's keep that for sure even if we have to cut something else because it
seems like the wrong for me it seems like the wrong time to make that cut >> and yeah and you're correct I thank you for that comment I think that the pieces that the um it hit differently for different levels so some of those things were added in strategic investments for the secondary level or it was added at a
larger piece for other levels you know in different buckets so that's where it's like we have to have that deeper for conversation about how to really truly support our our students and staff. >> I think that's a important point board members. So over time the district over
the years has funneled our compensatory dollars to the elementary. So the reason the strategic investments were put in place was to those were the dollars that were invested in the secondary title and compensatory have over the years and I'm looking at Michelle Vargas
to verify this really been targeted at the elementary and so to give any any you know added support secondary was through set aside some fund balance one time for a period of time and then see re-evaluate where we're at down the line. So, as we're wrestling with I am
worried about the compensatory piece that we talked about earlier in the meeting because that is if the state changes our our funding on that that's another big impact right we also know there's a statewide special ed look right now too for 250 million so may I'll pause there and just ask Michelle
to you know if you want to comment on that >> some of the history the going back on some of the history on those positions that they're talking about the literacy specialist and math specialists are coaches at the elementary level. Um we don't have those coaches funded out at
the secondary level. Um from that standpoint and then the interventions that were added with for second or for elementary the lits out of ESER when we went into strategic investments, we basically looked at title one all goes
to elementary. The majority of compensatory all goes to elementary for their coaching model. So when they did the strategic investment instead of doing 42% elementary and that they did a third a third a third so that secondary could add some of those items. So as
that's one time it goes away. Um what they were looking at then in the remodel of the coaching model was enabled was those 50 coaches at elementary which is basically two coaches per building versus the lack of coaches at a
high school or a middle school which are much larger um through different sources. So the restructure that they're talking about is really just um the focus that has always been more on the elementary and trying to stretch it out K12 because the losses through the
strategic investment for the most part um was the backfill to get secondary at that same level and protecting those 30 literacy intervention. The reason it ended up being those 30 the esser dollars the way they came there was this portion that they were trying to force outside of the building and the only way
you could make that work was at elementary in the building. So the rest of the ESRE funds that we took, we ended up with the three million at elementary and two million at secondary even though it's 42% of the kids in that and that. So you're keeping the intervention at
the elementary but the the intervention potentially if you get rid of the rest of the er so that's where looking at that coaching model with the 50 FTE and trying to restructure that was kind of what they're looking at. just the it's the history that's kind of been built up on some of the the different staffing
over the years. >> Thanks. It's it's good insight. >> I it's it's not um I mean the logic is all right. It's I think really what we're hearing is the the the the reduction in middle school and high school is probably it's
it's a pro it's a problem on its own, but let's not solve it by taking them out of the elementary. I think is I if I am now putting it all together, I think that's what I'm hearing. Um, but I'll verify it when I talk to them. So, thanks. >> And you might hear the opposite if you talk to the middle school and high
school principles. >> I don't doubt I will. >> I hope you do. >> It's I I'm sure I will. >> It's uh for and again I think it's a separate problem needs a solution. But the elementary we all know the crit critical nature of the the learn to read
early. So that that that to me is why that one is in in a scale of really important things. It probably has it has to come over the top a little bit. Well, and I think to just build upon that point and to that with
the literacy intervention teachers coming from Esser being sort of set aside fully all in a bucket by themselves, it might be worthwhile with the time that we still have before this decision comes to us to talk about what does it look like if we think about that
and we think about the coaches together. You know, it might not be that we need all 32 literacy intervention teachers and, you know, lose all the coaches. It it might be like, let's look at this together and see what each are offering to the picture and see how it is being uh used
to the end goal of increasing our students skills and ability to read in the earliest grades. We we know from years of experience, evidence uh based research studies and data that the earlier we can intervene with a student and the earlier we can get them on
track, the better success that they'll have and the less time it takes to intervene with them, right? You catch them early and you get them straightened uh you know out onto the path that they need to be. It's it's much more effective. So perhaps what we're hearing
is like keeping that esser section fully protected and out of the conversation might not be serving us. >> And I can maybe add thank you director Duchaine the um option two did back out all the literacy staff. So what went
from 8.6 now to 4.6. It's it's the non it's all those other supports that are mainly secondary. Um that's one way. So option three took it a step further and said we could we minimize the impact of those original ESR positions even more down to 1.8 by doing different things.
Um so I I think it's fair director's first uh earlier comment about you can really look at all these now some of them we did say in this option it's this much but in this options it's more or less but you can at least can you can connect those dots pretty easily. Um
so you know you're you're getting a wider range of potential options here. Um it's just helpful for us to get like where where are the common interests lying amongst the board members um that we can dial this in even more and you know we will have more detail the exact
positions. We're just being very respectful of identifying individuals until we we know it's it's down to that point in the in the last meeting. So we can probably get to a point of the uh impact on each level, middle school, high school, elementary or or any of the
um departments centrally because you're really talking about FTE. >> Um moving to just a slightly different topic um because it came up in the feedback that we received from the community meetings that we did. Um, do
we have any district-owned buildings that we're not using that are just sitting idle? >> I don't know if Corey, you want to answer. I see Greg answering that it's on the record. Yes. Okay. I did know that that was the answer, but I thought it was important to put into the room and into the conversation.
>> We're down to very few leased spaces, too. >> Right. Um the other piece on that, uh the Rapids Family Mall where we have a leased space right now that is talked about as a consideration here for savings. I think we've seen great success moving away from leased facilities that we don't have control
over, that are not always maintained to the level that we want for our students and our families that are visiting them uh is a wise choice. I've talked with the uh director of community education so that the programming that has been happening in that space is being accounted for. they have plans for uh
transitioning that. So, it's not um it's not that the early childhood class experiences are disappearing. They're just being moved and realigned. So, I just want to assure the public that's listening that that is being considered. I know it wasn't maybe as obvious in the
discussion with the high level. Um but I think that's important. Um and and the other piece uh that does not solve our situation right now, but as a future looking board and forwardthinking
people, um every person 100% to a te that I spoke with in person at all of the community meetings asked about why we're not talking about options for increasing revenue at the same time that we're talking about options for cutting. So that would be um a levy, right?
asking our voters to weigh in on a levy. I think when I looked at the feedback form that we got of 159 people, um 65 referenced a levy and 74 referenced a referendum and they might have been some and the same. So, you know, anywhere
between 40 to 87% of our respondents in that survey asked, why aren't you talking about increasing revenue? Um, the other comment that they had there, not not just based on taxes, but was about an online school. And it sounds like you're getting at perhaps that
information as to like would that be a place for us to retain students or draw students into the district if we had an online option. I know at um times we had one and then we had moved away from that. um possibly another consideration that we should be putting into the
discussion to see if that's making a difference at our secondary level or not. Uh so I just wanted to raise that. I thought that that feedback was so consistent and so um prevalent that it it warrants being brought into the conversation uh as we're figuring out
what comes next. All right, I will follow up with some comments as well if nobody else has anything to say. Um, kind of on the heels of what Director Desane was saying. Um, let me just give the my quick opinion on the options. So, option two I wish wouldn't even be discussed
anymore because the board has made it clear that we're not interested in the model the middle school model change. So, unless that has changed and I'm unaware, there's no, you don't have four board members. So, it's that one's dead on arrival. Um, there might be good pieces in it, but that component, at
least for me, is not going to get a vote. Option three, I completely agree with what Director Adet said based on what we heard tonight. For now, it's a no-go. I perhaps that will change. I I'm skeptical, but option three is just no for me. and then option one
um so I suppose it's viable but we we're kind of back in then in the field of there's only one option at least so far as I'm concerned really being present one viable option um being presented and it includes teachers getting cut in
there which I am open to the idea of cutting teachers like it but it it's again as comments have been made it's weighted against everything else you know making sure that there really are no other options. Um, only then would I
be okay with doing that. And so BA and so kind of going back to the beginning of this discussion and I I want to follow up on your comment about the referendum. Um, because people have asked me as well like why don't you do a referendum? So there there's a very I
guess for me I will say this in the nicest way possible, but there's a very simple reason that at least for now I'm not in favor of a referendum. although I have in the past stated that I would certainly be willing to do one um if the whole board was included in the budgeting process because as you have
pointed out director Duchaine we should represent the entire community not just half of the community and so you might disagree that that is what is taking place but to kind of just wa to show you what to illustrate what I'm talking about let's walk through how this is this entire budget cut process has played out from the beginning to my
knowledge there's only one board member was a director of debt who gave any kind criteria before any options were brought forward um about what he wanted to see. Again, maybe somebody else did. I'm unaware, but he had mentioned, "Please don't cut any teachers. I want to see what we can do without cutting any
teachers." The very first option brought forward included cuts to teachers. Now, that might be the option we go. I don't know. But what that says to me as just a passive observer is it he's just ignored. Director Adette was simply just ignored. His request was ignored. Again,
not saying that his request was necessarily going to be a good idea, but to not even just start with, hey, you're the only one who asked for this, so let me show you what that looks like and then we can consider it. That to me is kind of how I feel the whole budgeting process has gone just generally speaking
since I've been on the board. Um, it's rather opaque. I you can disagree with me if you want, but I feel like the three of us, Directors Adet, Hulman, and myself have largely been ignored on these things. That's why um when it I mean there was the the budget where I
was the swing vote per se and that's perhaps the best example of that. I I didn't necessarily agree with everything I was voting for but I chose to vote for anyways. Um and the reason that I I can actually point to something specific now to show you why I feel it is opaque and
it is the fact that um one board member again it was director Adet was able to ask one question about PSO in a random meeting we had and suddenly we have about $2 million that have materialized out of thin air so to speak. And so if the the story brought to the board is
you need to cut 8 million and because one board member asked one question, it turns out we probably only really need to cut 6 million. To me that that's that jumps out as okay. So what else then are we missing, right? And again echoing what he said, I I don't know what I
don't know. And some of these things seem transparent to me. Some of them seem rather opaque. And so I I don't know where I should land if I if there's parts of the budget I think aren't being given a fair consideration. And like I've already said, options two or two
two and three for now are off the table for me. So kind of circling all the way back around to answer what you had brought up, Director Duchaine. I if you ask why I don't want to support a referendum, it's the very simple reason that it is my opinion and you can certainly disagree that half of the board because
the board is split after all. half of the board has been since I've been on the board routinely ignored and disregarded when it comes to what we've requested for budget inputs. And so it would be a very strange thing for me personally to go back to my the people who voted for me and say, "Hey, I know
you voted for me. I know I'm here on the board representing you and I know that I'm routinely ignored and my input is not taken. In fact, usually the opposite of what I ask occurs. But hey, would you guys be willing to give more of your taxpayer dollars to the district even though your representative is being
ignored? That's a very strange question to ask people. One that I'm not willing to ask quite frankly. And so if the whole board were were taken into consideration for these cuts, I would be very happy to go out for a referendum. And I would tell everyone who voted for me, yes, please, by all means, vote for
this. We need the money. But again, I go back to do we really need the money? If a single question results in $2 million materializing out of thin air, I'm not even convinced we do need the money. So that that's the most basic reason why at this
time I'm not willing to do a referendum. But to again kind of go what I said in the past if we had a process in place that guaranteed the whole board was included. And the way I described it was when we pass a budget, obviously not right now, these are budget cuts but not
a budget. If when if we pass a budget, there's any line item or anything on that budget, any bucket that any board member wants to call into question, and then if we can't find a majority of the board that wants it, that that item is then removed. Okay, perfect. Well, that if we were to put that process in place,
that guarantees that a majority of the board would approve of every single item on the budget all of the time. And so, the fact that the board has not agreed to that, again, that just kind of speaks to the whole, well, why not? because it's not one-sided. Both halves of the
board in the way that it is split would have that same opportunity. So, I'm not asking to have any kind of privilege that the other half of the board wouldn't also have. I'm trying to make it as fair as possible. And so, the fact that that fair request has been disregarded. I that kind of is the proof
of what I'm saying. We have been disregarded. So, I I'm not really terribly comfortable going back to the people who voted for me and ask them to support a referendum when their board member is being ignored. So, I also want to touch on the stats you mentioned because I've also kind of
had some experience with this now that I've been on the board. Um, the question is, does the community want a referendum? Without actually going to the polls, we don't know for sure, but here's what we do know. Last year, when we did the Morris Leatherman survey, and correct me if I'm wrong, it came back
about a 50-50 split. It wasn't super clear if the public wanted it or not. I believe uh Superintendent McIntyre had said or had recommended you know do it but don't necessarily count on it succeeding because it's it's not clear. So the Morris Leman survey which I
believe pulled I want to say it was 900 well 500 people but there's a parent balloon so I think it was like a total of 900 which represents um well actually I'll get to that in a second. That survey um it said it it's not actually clear at
all. So, I don't actually know if the public wants to do a referendum. Um, but if you look at all of the forms of feedback that the public has provided and look at them in their entirety rather than kind of in a vacuum, um, I actually did crunch at least a couple numbers here and here's what I got. So,
if you take the, uh, community feedback, um, I believe if you include the people who show up to the meetings and the people who filled out the survey in totality, I think it was 219. And so, I took the total number of people in the district. This number could be off by a little but I I um in fact somebody
correct me if this is wrong otherwise all my math will be wrong here but it's somewhere on the order of like 250,000 people. Does that sound about right total people in the district? Okay. So I had I googled it. It was 250 255,645 to try to keep it to just adults um
people who can vote taxpayers. I excluded just the number of students in our school district. Again it's going to be an imperfect number. where we have people who open roll into the district. But take out 37,465 students. So of the 219 that provided feedback that come that lands us at a
whopping.1% of the adults in our district provided feedback. Now that feedback is very important and I appreciate that they gave it to us and I wish more people in the district would give us feedback. But the reality is when you look at that, as sad as this is, I wish it wasn't this
way. The community simply just didn't want to provide input. that that is the overwhelming message to me if only 0.1% of people decided to weigh in. I the message that's sent to me is they they for whatever reason don't want to provide feedback. Again, I wish they
would. But so now let's look at a different metric. The other metric um is the Morris Leatherman survey that we did not this year but last year. So there's 900 people that provided input on that. Again divide by number of people in the district minus students you get about
04%. Okay. So the 04% of the district on that survey that wasn't even clear that they wanted a referendum and it was about a 50/50 split of the 4% of people that were even surveyed. Now this brings us to the last metric. If you simply
look at the board members here and count this is how I did this. Count strictly the number of votes that were cast total both for the board members here who won their elections and for the their opponents who lost. I got ju sometimes there were like third third candidates
who got a couple votes. I counted the two big ones for each race when it occurred. I got I think it was around again my numbers could be a little off but I I added them to 27,926 people provided input. Okay. So take that number same metric divide by number
of adults in the district. That's about 12.8% of the district. Okay. So the single biggest metric that is going to speak to what the community has said are in fact the elections that have occurred and really there's going to be another election here soon. That's 12.8% of
feedback compared to point4 on the Morris Leatherman survey and 0.1 on the on the community feedback we got. Again still valuable but just comparing them kind of apples to apples. And so if the biggest metric we have the 12.8% 8% um
sent directors Adet Hulkman and myself here and the three of you as well, but according to me, you could disagree with me if you want, the three of us are routinely ignored on the budget. That just doesn't make sense to me to ignore the really the larger part of the the largest feedback we got. And if you want
to break it down even further, look at just the vote totals that the six board members who won got. The three of us, directors Adette, Hokman, and myself got 10,63 and directors Langfeld, Deshaane, and Simon in their elections got 6,200
votes. So of the 16,263 votes, the three of us got 62% and the three of you got 38%. So of the six board members, the three of which whom I believe are routinely ignored, we actually got 62% of the vote. We represent the majority of the people who put these six board members here and we are routinely
ignored. That would be why at this time I'm not interested in doing a referendum. Director Langenfeld, >> I would like to um just share that uh as I think about and reflect on the board process and the strategy and the budget philosophy.
One of the important parts that we did talk about was we talked about our priorities. We talked about uh being student centered. Um, and here's and this is a previous I I spoke about what I thought the priorities should be as well, but
not I clearly hadn't been heard either. Um, so I I think that the leaders had to provide input. We asked for more input from our principles because I thought that we we had some concerns about that.
And I also have on my list, we talked about zerobased budgeting which director brought up. So we actually talked about that was those were what I had noted as our our budget reduction strategies going in putting kids at the center
which made sense looking at our strategic priorities which show up in the current budget we have and um looking for more detail. We asked for more leader input and clearly we got that as well. So, a lot of these things
we did not do zerobased budgeting. And so, for me personally, I had asked for a very um needs-based budget based on what we need to deliver. And that's really what I'm still looking for is how are we going to address the needs as best we
can with the limited resources we have. And there are different ways to come to those buckets as well. And so I just want to put that on the table that I think we were aligned on several things as we moved through this process whether
it came forward to others. I mean there are things we can agree with. I wholeheartedly agree we need to frontend loan to elementary especially in the literacy piece. Quite frankly we just invested $4.5 million
on in CKLA curriculum. the Reed Act only gave us $2.93 million. So, we didn't even come close. And that whole budget um is really a place in space where we're going to need much more. 5 million
to 7 million. So, I want to be very clear that we have some set goals and priorities together as a group. Um, quite frankly, the people who show up at the polls are the ones who want to voice
their perspectives and opinions, and I think that's a a totally different conversation in regard to the levy, but but we'll keep that for now. I want to let our public know, and this is really uh well done, and I don't know who was
behind it. Uh Michelle, you were Vargas because it was a conversation you and I had had about um just the the budget funding because some I've had people come up and say, "Well, we got 5 million for the Reed Act." And and we didn't, of
course. Um, but we put out a frequently asked FAQ Q&A on the district website and it has a lot of information particularly about unfunded mandates that I think our community
needs to see. And so as we think about our budget forward, you know, the concerns when we talk about compad dollars really concerning um where they will end up and and the directs and will what will they accept,
you know, and you know, anybody who's been at the legislature has heard this conversation and talked to their legislators about it. Very concerning. So we are looking at a place where we're in time at this snapshot which could
continue to be problematic and that's the piece that I want to make sure um that we we have the best forward thinking with the limited resources were afforded and so forth. So um I invite
people to go to that FAQ. I think there's especially that unfunded mandate piece just jumped out. there's a a brief highle discussion about referendum and why we're not there. Um and I think that um many other things in there as well.
One of the things I want to clarify in the middle school programming piece um we have a fine arts middle school and I I just want to clarify that as we're talking about this I can't talk about
that in the same way that I think of our other middle schools. In other words, I would not ask them to move to a sixth period day. I don't know how we can deliver the fine arts programming without changing the whole school. That's my opinion having looked at those
curriculum in those in the school and to talk about that. So, I just wanted that. It's not on I looked to see if we had had that on the website and it doesn't say that that if we cut it would be all I think is what it's indicated. But I
have concerns about how we can deliver that program there which is considered a specialty program just as a SIMS and a biomed and and the others and then call it what it is. So anyway, thank you.
>> Any other thoughts or comments from board members? All right. Well, thank you guys very much for the presentation and we are moving on to our to item number
10, general counsel. Um, welcome Tim Palmir. Thank you, Chair Arco, Chair Duchaine, board members, and Superintendent McIntyre. Um, we're uh actually going to be uh bringing forward uh two separate policies tonight. The first policy uh
for first reading is policy 532 which concerns the use of peace officers and school resource officers and crisis teams to remove students from uh school that are on IEPs. Um this policy has been in effect since 2004. It was revised in 2017.
Um actually we were contemplating some additional modifications to this policy when the statute concerning SRO was briefly uh changed. Now it's changed back again. Uh but we're going to this this particular um change actually reflects some of the uh language that is
in and around the statute on SRO's. The policy itself is a little bit of a of an oddity. It is a policy that's required by Minnesota statute 121A55. Um there's not a lot of detail in terms of what needs to be required in this policy. Anyway, revisions to this policy
and the accompanying procedures which we are just uh uh providing along with the policy for the board's u examination consideration. They're really being proposed to ensure that the policy comports with recent changes to the law regarding the use of law enforcement in schools and our current SRO contracts.
So, consistent with Minnesota statute 626.8482, 8482. The revisions to the policy make it clear that SRO's should not be involved in the enforcement of school rules and their intervention uh their interventions should be limited. Um and you'll really look at that that
paragraph D in the um in the policy really kind of um brings that home and reflects that provision in uh statute. Uh the procedures that accompany the policy um we're also going to be uh tweaking as well. Um, it really essentially reflects new definitions and
requirements of Minnesota law. Uh, that include the definition of SRO's. Um, things that constitute an emergency situation warranting the use of restrictive procedures, the definition of physical holds, the definition of reasonable force for school officials.
Um, also carving out um, a clear exception for SRO's in terms of their standards for reasonable force. Importantly, the policy, as I just alluded to, uh makes it clear that SROs are not subject to the same limits and the use of force that applies to school officials officials. Um again,
reflecting uh the concerns that we previously had about uh law enforcement having to essentially uh be um following um employee standards for uh the use of force. Um and finally, uh the procedures
incorporate requirements of state law requiring reporting to the state on the use of restrictive procedures and reasonable force by staff. So after discussion, excuse me, of this uh policy at the um policy meeting on October 13th, the committee recommended moving
this forward for prop uh the proposed revisions forward for first reading tonight. And with that, I can take any questions. Any questions from board members? >> Director. Uh I just my my question I guess is so we a lot of this we had to
change based upon statute and then are the limits or things that we placed are they if I read the statute are they going to be pretty direct uh into are they are we restricting andor enabling
SRO's to do things or not do things based on an interpretation of the statute or somewhat directly from it. >> We we we I drew the changes from uh the actual statutory language. Um I think
it's an interesting thing. I've had a a number of conversations with Tim Forner about this and um you know getting the law enforcement perspective. >> I think we're I think what we're trying to do is draw some pretty clear lines between what's a school employee function, a teacher function, an
administrator function, and what an SRO, a police officer function is. And I think that this um this tracks with the statute in terms of of making sure those distinctions are there, the roles are treated differently. I think it also reflects what um I think what our law
enforcement also want to see as well. I think our law enforcement doesn't want to be involved in uh making sure that uh student a gets down to detention or or um uh someone uh is necessarily um you know engaged in a um is engaged with a
teacher is is maybe not being compliant but uh that's not really law enforcement function in in order to engage in that. So, uh, to answer your question, I think it it does reflect, um, what, uh, what the statutory changes are, uh, with respect to, um, kind of finding the lane
for SRO's and school officials. >> Okay. >> Director Wangfeld, yeah, now it's I appreciate this um, language um, just for that very reason, but quite frankly, I had two very gifted SRO's. one we saw his picture up there
tonight um during my principal ships and they were very clear what would be a law enforcement role and what would not. So it was really helpful. I had Pat Carlson over at Rapids Middle and Andy Youngquist and they they both you know
both Rapids Police Department at that time and an NOKA seemed to to have this understanding. That was my experience. Very positive too. very helpful but to put it in writing will be very important. Clear clarity.
>> Thank you. >> Um any other thoughts from board members? Otherwise um thank you for the update and we will move on to well the next policy item 10B.
Yes, this uh policy um policy 524 uh concerning acceptable uses. All of you uh know this actually came before the board at the meeting on August 25th. Um we actually uh had uh further discussions at the policy committee meeting on October 13th and received
after receiving a little bit of feedback um from board. >> Sorry, can I interrupt? Did you say 524? >> Did I say that wrong? 524 acceptable use. >> No, you said that right. That's That's item C. But that's >> I'm sorry. Did I I move I jumped on. So
>> you're totally fine. >> Yeah, >> I I did include I did include that uh conversation. I was actually talking about the procedures along with it. >> I can I can uh answer any questions with respect to that. I think >> No, you're fine. My bad. Sorry.
>> If I might, I'll just maybe I I did get past it a little bit too quickly. Um, a lot of what you'll see in there is is really um definitions which come out of of statute. For example, the definition of SRO's, the definition of an emergency, the definition of physical holds.
Obviously, we want to align our policy as much as possible with statute um and our procedures as well. And so that's uh a lot of what that reflects. >> All right. Any thoughts from board members? If not, uh my apologies. continue on item or the
>> policy file. >> Actually, I will own that though because I think that the way that it's listed is is two items uh two items that we're talking about in that regard. >> Um so, excuse me. Um before us tonight, he is second reading for policy 524.
Um really what I guess what I want to just uh jump to is is that I I introduced this policy um on August 25th. Um I think if I can uh try to capture where some of the concerns were. Um there was a concern with uh respect to the general statement of the policy
and it was revised to address a concern that the policy appeared to only promote the use of technology and I think um uh director Simon had uh expressed some interest in making sure that the revision also encourages appropriate limits or restrictions where that's
warranted. uh specifically to align with academic concerns about academic integrity or support for school district strategic directives. Um so obviously I don't think we wanted the language of the policy to suggest that that technology was was going to be uh
warranted at all costs. Um secondly uh uh there were some concerns I think that were raised by um uh director Odette about the need for clarity about uh you know maybe on some of the definitional things that we had in terms of unacceptable uses. Um I will admit that
uh that I I struggle to think at least uh in terms of how we would define you know so many things that are actually in the MSBA policy. uh things like uh defining lewd uh rude, inflammatory, threatening, disrespectful. Those are things which uh which you know kind of
don't necessarily lend themselves to further definition. And actually in thinking about it um wanted to come back with the idea that maybe we actually pulled that out from what MSBA was. uh this is was again an MSBA largely an MSBA uh model language uh and actually
moving towards uh something that actually simplified it and makes basically made sure that we were really trying to limit those things which I think um uh this policy really gets at in terms of acceptable use uh things such as uh uh pornog pornography obscene
materials um those types of things which uh which our filters uh really address. Um so it was an effort to perhaps just simplify the language rather than uh provide you know further detailed definition. And then finally uh based upon the conversation that we had uh at
the board meeting or some of the suggestions um there was a discussion about a review uh process every three years. And so um we made uh those additional changes. I'm happy to answer questions at all about the larger policy. Um but we wanted to bring that
uh forward to you on second read. Typically we bring those forward on uh the consent agenda but wanted to provide some space for further questions and if need be uh some further clarifications and coming back uh again if there's uh any any particular concerns
>> any thoughts or comments from board members? Okay. Um hearing none uh members before us is the rewrite of the acceptable use policy. Is there a motion to approve it as presented? >> Thank you, Director Adet. Is there a
second? >> Thank you, Director Langenfeld. Is there any discussion? All right, hearing none. Will the Will acting clerk Casey Dasha call the role, please? >> Director Simon, >> I. >> Director Hookman, >> I. Director Aette
>> I. >> Director Langenfeld >> I. >> Dashaine is I. >> Uh, co-chair Arco >> I. Six in favor and zero opposed. Um, the acceptable use policy passes. Um, thank you Mr. Palmir. >> Thank you.
>> The next agenda item is a labor relations update item 11A. Welcome Dr. Cherry, chief human resources officer. Good evening, co-chair Arco, members of the board, Superintendent McIntyre. Uh, pleased to be here this evening to talk
about a labor relations update. Um this update is uh in alignment with our policy 209 negotiation code of ethics which indicates that administration will review the status of negotiations at public schoolboard meetings. Uh just a
note this is consistent with open meeting law in Pelra and we do reserve detailed negotiation discussions for close session with the school board in our contract negotiations. Uh we have several bargaining goals specifically um
uh looking at a collaborative bargaining process which we uh find very useful in working with our employee groups on finding mutual gains, solving shared problems. Uh we look for legally sound and operationally manageable agreements
with clear and concise language. Um we do focus our uh efforts and negotiations uh to ensure that our contracts allow us to recruit and retain highquality staff. Um and always we are looking at being fiscally responsible stewards of our
taxpayer money. And so as we are negotiating contracts um we ensure that we are um uh within the fixed budget that is um available to us. um not only
for uh the one-year or the two-year uh term of the contract, but also any kind of contract negotiate negotiation items uh that may have tales on them and and continue into the future.
Background information on our employee groups, we do have uh 18 employee groups in ANOC Hannipin. Five of those are unaffiliated groups and 13 are collective bargaining groups. We have uh one uh group at this time uh with a 20
uh 2025 through 2027 master agreement community school coordinators. Um and we have several groups with uh two-year agreements for the term of 2024 through 2026. And at this time we are negotiating actively with several groups
um that are currently operating under 2023 through 2025 master agreements. And those are the groups that I'll talk about next. Uh before getting into some of the specifics on open contracts and negotiation meetings status, uh some
facts that are important for us to consider in um our our contracts and how our um employment contracts do affect the overall budget or um interplay with the overall budget. Looking at FY26, our general fund salaries and benefits total
uh approximately $539 million. Um when we look at the general fund, um that is um the the major source of how we are paying for the salary and benefits for our employees. Um if we were to take a 1% increase on salaries and benefits uh
for these employee groups, it's about $5.39 million. If we were to look at a 1% increase on the formula, the basic general education formula, it's equal to three million. So the important point here, the important type takeaway is um
every 1% that's increased in the uh general formula does not provide us enough revenue uh to pay for a 1% increase in our salaries and benefits for our employees. Uh the salaries and benefits uh for our employees are
approximately 82% of our general fund budget. Within the FY26 uh fiscal year, our budget has included a 2 and a half incre 2 and a half% increase in salaries and a 5% increase in benefit. So as we're
looking at negotiating these contracts across the board, uh again, uh wanting to ensure that we're um fiscally responsible and um staying within budget. that has been our target. So, um uh some uh information about our
open contracts and various groups that we are actively negotiating with. Um very pleased to say with our building service employees, these are custodian warehouse and um buildings and grounds employees, maintenance employees. Um just under 200 employees in this group.
We have arrived at a tenative agreement uh after we've been in mediation with this group. Uh after a full day of of mediation, uh we did arrive at that tenative agreement. Um and uh just a note any um negotiations that are
happening in mediation, any proposals that are exchanged throughout mediation uh are private and confidential. So, uh, upon ratification, uh, of that contract, uh, we will bring it forward to the board with details, um, and ask for, uh,
the the board to authorize that vote or authorize that agreement. We anticipate that that will happen at the next business meeting. The next group is our our largest group of employees, our teachers. This includes our AB and ECFE teachers. And
new this round, it um also includes our preschool teachers. Go back one slide. Um that includes uh about 3,200 employees. We are in active mediation with this group. We met one time. Our
next mediation session is scheduled for November 6th. Uh the next group that we have is our technical specialists. We met with this group three times. Um our next meeting is actually tomorrow. So this is a very small group of technical specialists um
predominantly uh working at the district office includes 14 uh individuals and um we are um very close to an agreement with this group. Moving forward to the next page,
principles are our next um our next group and uh we just met with our our principles today um for the third time and uh still exchanging um uh where our strongest interests are
and and trying to come to some um common agreements with our principles. Uh the next group is our child nutrition assistants. We met for the or we are planning to meet for the third time on November 3rd. Um and finally, our school office supervisors, we have not met with
this group yet. Our our first meeting is scheduled for November 12th. Additional open contracts that we have in place. Um we have two groups that we have not been able to schedule uh our
first negotiation meeting with yet. uh the community school programmers and early childhood screeners uh is a small group made up of approximately nine employees. Uh this group is represented by a noah Henipin Education Minnesota, the same um group
that represents our teachers, our largest bargaining group. So uh typically we will um close out negotiations um arrive in an agreement with teachers and we start with this group next. Uh and then finally our special education administrators.
Um uh this is a group of approximately 15 employees and um we uh have yet to schedule a meeting with them. So looking forward at next steps, as I mentioned earlier, um the groups that we
are in current mediation with, those uh proposals that are exchanged are all confidential until we uh exit uh mediation. Um but we will continue to provide regular updates at schoolboard meetings um and share information that
is available. Uh we also have a website. You'll see the link here. Uh hschools uh usnegotiations. This website is currently being updated. And as you saw earlier this evening in Superintendent McIntyre's update. We
also have a new jobs uh website that is just gone live uh today uh predominantly used for uh recruitment purposes. And um there is uh uh some additional information that will also be linked
there in regard to contracts. And at that time at this time I'm open to any comments or questions from from board members. >> Any comments or questions from board members? >> Okay. Well, hearing none, thank you very
much for the presentation. Um yeah, >> thank you. So, we are nearing our last board agenda item. Item 12, board correspondence and communication. Members, this is your opportunity to sh to share happenings in your community, report on committee assignments, or
other items of interest. Does anyone have anything to share? Director Deshaine, >> just really quick since it's getting very late. I enjoyed attending the parade on Friday with our elementary schools in Anoka. uh the big parade of
little people with the district and seeing all of our middle school marching bands. They did an exceptional job playing and marching uh some of them for the very first time in a parade setting. So very proud of all the work that they've done. >> Director Wangfeld.
>> Thank you. I also I also um was with director Duchain at uh that amazing day and our bands are extraordinary out there. Very proud of them. I did have the opportunity and I
see uh Director Simon is still with us. Um immediately after our presentation with um the the uh director of our STEP program, um we both reached out to Dr. Ziggler and said, "We'd like to go take
a visit." And so we had an extraordinary visit out there um at the techn uh the secondary teched program out at STEPP and uh had a had a royal tour with Jess Leapa and Sean Beans. Thank you for that. And our deputy superintendent
Constantine joined us as well as Dr. Ziggler. And I thought what was really h really impressive the extraordinary experiences our kids are being afforded out there. Everyone needs to see the access to CNC
machining. Um the number of welding booths is extraordinary. They are on a college campus being able to access high quality instruction and resources and materials. the automotive place was extraordinary
um in that they had different different opportunities, different kinds of cars, different kinds of vehicles to get their certifications. I I I was just pretty blown away and I had been there in the past. But also um
a big shout out to Jess who has developed those partnerships with the with the college. I think it's really important to recognize that through her relationships and leveraging partnerships, the amount of cost savings she's bringing into the district. She
shared just one thing about how they've been they figured out how to use their um their simulation machine that they use for a aviation and they could just instead of buying new simulation
machining or uh equipment to do over the road truck driving a simulation um for that they can run the software in that and save thousands and thousands of dollars. So, big shout out to that whole program and all of those folks there.
And um I'm seeing director Simon and I I just really was impressed with that. And that's just a few of the things we saw out there as well. >> Any other updates? >> Any other updates from board members?
All right. Um the next item 13 will be conducted in closed session. The executive session will be closed to discuss labor negotiations pursuant to Minnesota statute 13D.03 to discuss matters with all open groups.
The closed session will be held in the Michael Sullivan room. I would entertain a motion to move to a closed session. >> Thank you, director. Is there a second? >> Thank you, Director Duchaine. Is there any discussion?
Hearing none. Will acting clerk Casey Duchaine call the role please. >> Director Simon >> I. >> Director Hman >> I. >> Director Aette >> I. >> Director Langenfeld >> I. >> Dashane is I. Coacher Arco >> I. With six in favor and zero opposed. We will move to the to executive session
in the Michael Sullivan room. We will take a brief fiveminut break. Heat. [Music] Heat. [Music]